From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Clements v. Aramark Corp.

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Sep 12, 2018
330 Conn. 904 (Conn. 2018)

Opinion

09-12-2018

Sharon CLEMENTS v. ARAMARK CORPORATION et al.

Dominick C. Statile, in support of the petition. Gary W. Huebner, in opposition.


Dominick C. Statile, in support of the petition.

Gary W. Huebner, in opposition.

The defendants' petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 182 Conn. App. 224, 189 A.3d 644 (2018), is granted, limited to the following issue:

"Did the Appellate Court properly determine that the condition causing the plaintiff's injury did not need to be ‘ "peculiar" ’ to her employment; Labadie v. Norwalk Rehabilitation Services, Inc. , 274 Conn. 219, 238, 875 A.2d 485 (2005), quoting Larke v. John Hancock Mutual Life Ins. Co. , 90 Conn. 303, 310, 97 A. 320 (1916) ; in order for her injury to arise out of her employment for purposes of workers' compensation benefits?"


Summaries of

Clements v. Aramark Corp.

Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Sep 12, 2018
330 Conn. 904 (Conn. 2018)
Case details for

Clements v. Aramark Corp.

Case Details

Full title:Sharon CLEMENTS v. ARAMARK CORPORATION et al.

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Date published: Sep 12, 2018

Citations

330 Conn. 904 (Conn. 2018)
192 A.3d 425

Citing Cases

Clements v. Aramark Corp.

We granted the defendant's petition for certification to decide whether, as the Appellate Court concluded,…