Legal Opinion
Mamudovski v. BIC Corp.
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided August 19, 2003No. AC 21957PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BISHOP, J.
The plaintiff, Nedzmije Mamudovski, appeals the judgment of the trial court rendered in favor of the defendant BIC Corporation.1 The plaintiff claims that the court improperly (1) granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment on her negligence claim set forth in count one of her amended complaint, (2) precluded and limited the testimony of a witness and (3) precluded evidence of the defendant’s obligation under the Workers’ Compensation Act, General Statutes § 31-275 et seq., to provide her light duty work. We affirm the judgment of the trial court in part and reverse…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Fort Trumbull Conservancy, LLC v. AlvesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Barry v. Quality Steel Products, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Pedersen v. VahidySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Milner v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
- Krevis v. City of BridgeportSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Vertex, Inc. v. City of WaterburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
- Boccanfuso v. ConnerConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
- Merritt v. United Parcel ServiceSupreme Court of Delaware · 2008
- Dubreuil v. WittConnecticut Appellate Court · 2003
- Hayes v. Caspers, Ltd.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2005
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.