Worsham v. Greifenberger
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BORDEN, J.
The dispositive issue in this appeal is whether the due process clause of the fourteenth *434amendment to the United States constitution requires that notice of the initiation of proceedings against a third party tortfeasor pursuant to the Workers’ Compensation Act; General Statutes § 31-293 (a);1 include, not only the notice requirements enumerated in the statute, but also notification that the failure of the recipient to move to intervene in the action within thirty days of the notice will result in the complete abatement of the recipient’s right to bring an action. The…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Mapp v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Weeks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Roth v. WestonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
- Giaimo v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
- Stafford Higgins Industries, Inc. v. City of NorwalkSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
- Cornelius v. Department of BankingConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
- Babich v. Bonadies, No. Cv00-0273122-S (May 3, 2001)Connecticut Superior Court · 2001
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.