From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ricigliano v. J. J. Ryan Corp.

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Mar 21, 2000
746 A.2d 787 (Conn. 2000)

Opinion

(SC 16129)

Argued February 15, 2000

Officially released March 21, 2000

Procedural History

Appeal by the plaintiff from the determination of the extent of his disability by the workers' compensation commissioner for the sixth district in granting the plaintiff's claim for benefits, brought to the compensation review board, which affirmed the commissioner's decision; thereafter, the plaintiff appealed to the Appellate Court, Landau, Hennessy and Sullivan, Js., which affirmed the decision of the compensation review board, and the plaintiff, on the granting of certification, appealed to this court. Appeal dismissed.

Robert B. Cohen, with whom was Louis Wang, for the appellant (plaintiff).

Dominick C. Statile, with whom was David Schoolcraft, for the appellees (defendants).


Opinion


After examining the record on appeal, particularly the evidentiary record, and considering the briefs and oral arguments of the parties, we have determined that the appeal in this case should be dismissed on the ground that certification was granted improvidently.

We granted the plaintiff's petition for certification to appeal from the judgment of the Appellate Court; Ricigliano v. J. J. Ryan Corp., 53 Conn. App. 158, 728 A.2d 1161 (1999); limited to the following issue: "Did the Appellate Court properly affirm the compensation review board's decision upholding the trial commissioner's finding of a 0.62 percent loss of hearing disability for the plaintiff?" Ricigliano v. J. J. Ryan Corp., 249 Conn. 923, 733 A.2d 234 (1999).


Summaries of

Ricigliano v. J. J. Ryan Corp.

Supreme Court of Connecticut
Mar 21, 2000
746 A.2d 787 (Conn. 2000)
Case details for

Ricigliano v. J. J. Ryan Corp.

Case Details

Full title:FRANK RICIGLIANO v . J. J. RYAN CORPORATION ET AL

Court:Supreme Court of Connecticut

Date published: Mar 21, 2000

Citations

746 A.2d 787 (Conn. 2000)
746 A.2d 787

Citing Cases

Vannoy-Joseph v. State, No

Our law does not require doctors to follow the Guides; Id.; Napolitano v. Bridgeport, 4388 CRB-4-01-5…

STRONG v. UTC/PRATT WHITNEY, NO

The 26-50% impairment range set forth in the guidelines for an individual with a diffusing capacity of 52%…