Cleveland v. U.S. Printing Ink, Inc.

577 A.2d 715, 216 Conn. 802, 1990 Conn. LEXIS 299
Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided July 11, 1990·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The defendants’ petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 21 Conn. App. 610, is granted, limited to the following issues:

“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that because there was sufficient contact with Connecticut by the plaintiff truck driver and his employer, both being domiciled in New Jersey, to give this state jurisdiction, the Connecticut workers’ compensation law, both procedural and substantive, should apply?
“Should the Appellate Court have dismissed the appeal suo motu for lack of a final administrative determination?”

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cleveland v. U.S. Printing Ink, Inc., 577 A.2d 715, 216 Conn. 802, 1990 Conn. LEXIS 299 (Colo. 1990).

577 A.2d 715 (Cleveland v. U.S. Printing Ink, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cleveland v. U.S. Printing Ink, Inc.
588 A.2d 194 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1991)