Hunter v. Chase Brass & Copper Co.
271 A.2d 327, 160 Conn. 550
Opinion
There is nothing in the record to support the claim of the plaintiff that the trial court erred in its conclusion that there was no abuse of discretion on the part of the commissioner in refusing to open and modify the finding and award which had been entered by stipulation of the parties. Meadow v. Winchester Repeating Arms Co., 134 Conn. 269, 57 A.2d 138.
There is no error.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hunter v. Chase Brass & Copper Co., 271 A.2d 327, 160 Conn. 550 (Colo. 1970).
271 A.2d 327 (Hunter v. Chase Brass & Copper Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Meadow v. Winchester Repeating Arms Co.
57 A.2d 138 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1948)