Legal Opinion

LaProvidenza v. State Employees' Retirement Commission

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided June 19, 1979PublishedCited by 35 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLongo, J.

The plaintiff has appealed from a judgment of the Court of Common Pleas in which he sought a declaratory judgment determining his retirement benefits as they were affected by the payment of a lump sum settlement under the Workmen’s Compensation Act. The facts underlying this controversy are not in dispute: The plaintiff had been employed for many years by the city of Bridgeport. The city participates in Fund B of the Connecticut Municipal Employees’ Retirement Fund which is administered by the defendant State Employees’ Retirement Commission. The plaintiff was eligible for normal, voluntary…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. United Aircraft Corporation v. FusariSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
  2. Sage-Allen Co., Inc. v. WheelerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
  3. City of Bridgeport v. Town of StratfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1955
  4. Bahre v. HogbloomSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
  5. Litchfield v. City of BridgeportSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1925

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

3Cited by35 opinions

  1. White v. BurnsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
  2. Peck v. JacqueminSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
  3. In re Juvenile Appeal (83-CD)Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
  4. Perille v. Raybestos-Manhattan-Europe, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
  5. Verrastro v. SivertsenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982

30 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