Dibello v. Barnes Page Wire Products, Inc.
Connecticut Appellate Court
1DissentFlynn, J.
While I concur with the majority that the board’s ruling as to the defendant ITT Hartford Group, Inc., should be affirmed, I respectfully dissent from the opinion of the majority as to the board’s ruling concerning the defendant Aetna Casualty & Surety Company (Aetna), and would reverse the board’s ruling as to it.
The judicial construction of provisions of our Workers’ Compensation Act is guided by long established principles. “[T]he Workers’ Compensation Act is remedial and must be interpreted liberally to achieve its humanitarian purposes.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Gil v.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Adzima v. UAC/Norden DivisionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
- Marchiatello v. Lynch Realty Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
- Gil v. Courthouse OneSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
- Grabowski v. MiskellSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
- Travelers Insurance v. HendricksonConnecticut Appellate Court · 1983
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.