Smith v. Yurkovsky
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
VERTEFEUILLE, J.
The sole issue in this appeal is whether the workers’ compensation review board (board) properly interpreted General Statutes § 31-275 (9) (B) (iv)1 as requiring a domestic worker to work an average of more than twenty-six hours per week for the twenty-six week period preceding the date of his or her injury in order to be considered an “employee” within the meaning of that statute, thereby entitling the worker to recover benefits under the Workers’ Compensation Act (act), General Statutes § 31-275 et seq. The plaintiff, Eileen Smith, claims that she had worked more than…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- State v. CourchesneSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Doe v. Yale UniversitySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2000
- Dowling v. SlotnikSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
- Hatt v. Burlington Coat FactorySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Kinney v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Simon Seeding & Sod, Inc. v. Dubuque Human Rights Commission and Jermaine StapletonSupreme Court of Iowa · 2017
- Dechio v. Raymark Industries, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2009
- Levarge v. GEN. DYNAMICS CORP., ELEC. BOATSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- Melendez v. Fresh Start General Remodeling & Contracting, LLCConnecticut Appellate Court · 2018
- Logan v. Sectek, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2009
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.