Legal Opinion
Cleveland v. U.S. Printing Ink, Inc.
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided May 29, 1990No. 8381PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDupont, C. J.
The defendants appeal from the decision of the compensation review division affirming the workers’ compensation commissioner’s granting of the plaintiff’s motion to preclude.
The plaintiff, a resident of New Jersey, is a truck driver employed by the named defendant, U.S. Printing Ink, Inc., a New Jersey corporation.1 In March, 1986, the plaintiff was injured in Connecticut during the course of his employment. He requested and received workers’ compensation benefits for this injury under the New Jersey Workers’ Compensation Act, although no final award was made in that state.
In September, 1986,…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Castro v. VieraSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- Thomas v. Washington Gas Light Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1980
- O'Connor v. O'ConnorSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- Texaco Refining & Marketing Co. v. Commissioner of Revenue ServicesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- Kennerson v. Thames Towboat Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1915
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Cleveland v. U.S. Printing Ink, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Lopa v. Brinker International, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- Jaiguay v. VasquezSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
- Stec v. Raymark Industries, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2009
- McCurdy v. StateConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.