Legal Opinion

Frantzen v. Davenport Electric

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided February 27, 2018No. AC39009PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBeach, J.

This case presents the issue of whether the Workers' Compensation Commission (commission) has the statutory authority, pursuant to General Statutes § 31-327 (b), 1 to decide fee disputes among attorneys who have represented a claimant at different times during the pendency of a case before the commission. Pursuant to General Statutes § 31-301b, the appellant, Enrico Vaccaro, 2 appeals from the decision of the Workers' Compensation Review Board (board), which affirmed in part the decision of the Workers' Compensation Commissioner (commissioner), insofar as it determined that the commission has…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. State v. GoldingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
  2. Powers v. Hotel Bond Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1915
  3. Connecticut State Medical Society v. Connecticut Board of ExaminersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
  4. Mello v. Big Y Foods, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
  5. Tufaro v. Pepperidge Farm, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1991

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Dahle v. Stop & Shop Supermarket Co.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2018
  2. Frantzen v. Davenport ElectricConnecticut Appellate Court · 2021
  3. Austin v. Coin Depot Corp.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2021
  4. Frantzen v. Davenport Elec.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API