Legal Opinion
Kiriaka v. Alterwitz
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided June 3, 1986No. 4040PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBieluch, J.
The plaintiff, Boleslaw Kiriaka, is appealing, pursuant to Practice Book § 3001, from the summary judgment rendered against him on the second count of his revised complaint in favor of the defendant Peter Lipscomb. The sole issue raised on appeal is the correctness of the trial court’s conclusion that Kiriaka’s suit against the defendant, his fellow employee, was preempted by the Workers’ Compensation Act under General Statutes § 31-293a.
The undisputed facts are as follows: On December 5, 1980, Kiriaka and Lipscomb were both employees of the intervening plaintiff, Puritan Furniture Company.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Mingachos v. CBS, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
- Stroud v. Board of Water CommissionersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1916
- Reetz v. MansfieldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
- Dias v. AdamsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Kegel v. McNeelyConnecticut Appellate Court · 1984
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Cirillo v. SardoConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
- Surprenant v. BurlinghamConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
- Dinino v. Federal Express Corp.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2017
- Axiotis v. Rodriguez, No. Cv89 0256474 S (Dec. 5, 1990)Connecticut Superior Court · 1990
- Bailey v. Campanaro Construction Company, No. 28 21 24 (Mar. 19, 1991)Connecticut Superior Court · 1991
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.