Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Mortenson

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided November 7, 1929PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHinman, J.

The situation and obligations of the parties to this action—the plaintiff Johnson as general contractor, and the defendant Mortenson as subcontractor—so far as concerns the claimants as dependents of the employee, Pascoal, were determined in Pascoal v. Mortenson, 109 Conn. 39, 145 Atl. 149, wherein the award against both, and their respective insurers, jointly, was affirmed as being in conformity to § 5345 of the General Statutes. We there held (p. 44) that, under that statute, no distinction can be recognized “in liability to the claimant” as between a contractor and his immediate employer,…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Palumbo v. George A. Fuller Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
  2. Fox v. Fafnir Bearing Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
  3. Byrne v. Henry A. Hitner's Sons Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
  4. Aisenberg v. Adams Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1920
  5. White v. George A. Fuller Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Colli v. Real Estate CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
  2. Bogoratt v. Pratt & Whitney Aircraft Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
  3. Morrisseau v. LegacSupreme Court of Vermont · 1962
  4. Fidelity & Casualty Insurance v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1938
  5. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Spring Brook Farm Dairy, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1949

22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API