-
[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.] PER CURIAM IN RE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT DATED JANUARY 3, 1990 Whether Henry Borkowski, M.D., the defendant, is a principal employer within the meaning of31-241 presents at best in this litigation a question of degree and fact for the trier. Grenier v. Grenier,138 Conn. 569 ,571 (1952); King v. Palmer,129 Conn. 636 ,639 (1943); Borgatt v. Pratt Whitney Aircraft Co.,114 Conn. 126 ,135-39 (1932).We do not think that either our case law or the parties' affidavits filed in connection with this motion support our concluding, as a matter of law, that in these circumstances Doctor Borkowski is a principal employer. The motion for summary judgment is denied.
So ordered. WILLIAM PATRICK MURRAY A JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT CT Page 2697
Document Info
Docket Number: No. 087212
Citation Numbers: 1990 Conn. Super. Ct. 2696
Judges: MURRAY, JUDGE.
Filed Date: 10/9/1990
Precedential Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 4/18/2021