Serrano & Serrano, LLC - Connecticut Lawyers - Accidents, Divorce, Social Security Disability, Immigration, Bankruptcy - Hartford 860 236-9350 * Waterbury 203 729-6100 * Toll-Free 800 856-6400

  For Workers Compensation Help Click Here 

Case:  DiNuzzo v. Dan Perkins Chevrolet Geo, Inc. (SC 17869) November 2009

Court:  Connecticut Supreme Court

District:  New Haven

Synopsis:  Although the deceased worker’s treating physician testified that his work-related injury resulted in inactivity and obesity that led to a heart attack, without some evidence establishing that the worker in fact suffered a fatal heart attack or actually suffered from atherosclerotic heart disease, the causal link between the compensable injury and the alleged manner of death simply was too weak to support a reasonable inference that the two events were connected.

Case Link:  http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR294/294cr756.pdf

Case Citation:  294 Conn. 132, 982 A.2d 157 (Conn. 2009)

   For Legal Help Click This Line 

Case:  Sokaitis v. Bakaysa (SC 18130) August 2009

Court:  Connecticut Supreme Court

Trial Court:  New Britain

Synopsis:  Because only legal gambling was involved, an agreement by two sisters to share any winning, including slot machines, cards, Foxwoods casino and lotter tickets, was enforceable so that one sister was required to share her Powerball winnings with the other sister.

Case Link:  http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR293/293CR115.pdf

Case Citation:  293 Conn. 17, 975 A.2d 51 (2009)

   For Family Law Help Click This Line 

Case:  Perricone v. Perricone (SC 17683) June 2009

Court:  Connecticut Supreme Court

Trial Court:  New Haven

Synopsis:  The parties entered into a confidentiality agreement during their divorce.  The separation agreement for the divorce did not include the separation agreement.  After the divorce, the wife argued that the confidentiality agreement was no longer in force because it was not included in the separation agreement.  The Supreme Court disagreed, stating it would have been “highly improbable” that the parties, upon dividing their property, intended to reduce the value of their property by exposing the husband’s business immediately to the harm that the agreement was intended to prevent.

Case Link:  http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR292/292CR78.pdf

Case Citation:  292 Conn. 187, 972 A.2d 666 (2009)

   For Criminal Law Help Click This Line 

Case:  State v. Browne (SC 18195) May2009

Court:  Connecticut Supreme Court

Trial Court:  Middletown

Synopsis:  A search pursuant to a warrant that mistakenly referred to cocaine instead of marijuana was constitutional because (1) the affidavit supporting the warrant correctly referred to marijuana and (2) the erroneous part of the warrant could be severed.

http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR291/291cr57.pdf

Case Citation:  Conn. App.  (2009)

   For Criminal Law Help Click This Line 

Case:  State v. Popeleski (SC 18250) May 2009

Court:  Connecticut Supreme Court

Trial Court:  Manchester

To admit evidence of failing the horizontal gaze nystagmus test in a drunk driving case, the state must show (1) that the test satisfies the criteria for admission of scientific evidence, (2) lay a proper foundation with regard to the qualifications of the individual administering the test and (3) demonstrate that the test was conducted in accordance with relevant procedures.

Case Link:  http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR291/291cr76.pdf

Case Citation:  291 Conn. 769, 970 A.2d 108 (2009)

   For Workers Compensation Help Click This Line 

Case:  Donahue v. Veridiem, Inc.  (SC 18237) May 2009

Court:  Connecticut Supreme Court

Workers’ Comp District:  New Britain

Synopsis:  An employer who fails to contest liability or pay benefits in a workers compensation case within 28 days of the injury cannot contest liability for the injury or the extent of disability.  The injured worker still has to present evidence to the commissioner to prove the case, but the employer cannot challenge that proof.

Case Link:  http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR291/291CR69.pdf

Case Citation:  291 Conn. 537, 547, 970 A.2d 630 (2009)

   For Legal Help Click This Line 

Case:  Cue Associates, LLC v. Cast Iron Associates, LLC (AC 28961) November 2008

Court:  Connecticut Appellate Court

Trial Court:  Hartford

Synopsis:  A defendant must specifically plead the statute of limitations unless it is jurisdictional or the plaintiff has been sufficiently informed that it is being raised as a defense.

Case Link:  http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROap/AP111/111AP19.pdf

   For Workers Compensation Law Help Click This Line 

Case:  Stearns & Wheeler, LLC v. Kowalsky Brothers, Inc. (SC 17906) 2008

Court:  Connecticut Supreme Court

Trial Court:  Hartford

Synopsis:  The estates of two workers who died on the job sued the general contractor for the wrongful deaths.  The general contractor sued the workers’ employer under the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practice Act (CUTPA).  The general contractor then assigned (gave the rights to) the CUTPA claim to the estates.  As a result of the assignment, the estates were suing the employer for the death of the workers.  The Supreme Court ruled against the estates, stating that because the Workers Compensation Act prohibits workers who are hurt at work (or the estates of workers who die on the jog) from suing their employers, the estates could not proceed with the case against the employer.

Case Link:  http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR289/289CR146.pdf

   For Car Accident Help Click This Line 

Case:  Schweiger v. Amica Mut. Ins. Co. (AC 28644) October 2008

Court:  Connecticut Appellate Court

Trial Court:  Hartford

Synopsis:  A driver testified that she was stopped for traffic on Route 44 in Avon when she was hit from behind.  No other evidence was presented of how the accident happened.  The Appellate Court agreed with the trial court that this evidence by itself was not enough to prove negligence.

Case Link:  http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROap/AP110/110ap508.pdf

   For Family Law Help Click This Line 

Case:  Finan v. Finan (SC 17918) July 2008

Trial Court:  Stamford  

Synopsis:  In making financial orders, a divorce court should consider preseparation dissipation of marital assets, so long as the dissipation occurs (1) in contemplation of divorce or separation or (2) while the marriage is in serious jeopardy or is undergoing an irretrievable breakdown.

Case Link:  http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR287/287CR118.pdf

   For Personal Injury Help Click This Line 

Case:  Rivers v. New Britain (SC 17863) July 2008

Court:  Connecticut Supreme Court

Trial Court:  New Britain

Synopsis:  City was responsible for fall on an ice-covered sidewalk, despite statute allowing city to transfer responsibility to adjoining property owner, because the adjoining property owner was the State, which was protected from the claim by governmental immunity.

Case Link:  http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR288/288CR116.pdf

   For Workers Compensation Help Click This Line 

Case:  Greene v. Aces Acess (AC 29007) September 2008

Court:  Connecticut Appellate Court

Synopsis:  A former college basketball player filed a workers compensation case claiming he had hurt his back at his job when he was lifting a patient in a wheelchair onto a ramp.  The Appellate Court upheld the denial of benefits, noting that the claimant had previously injured his back in a car accident and while playing basketball.

Case Link:  http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROap/AP110/110AP500.pdf