conflict of laws rule in Connecticut

2010Applying a conflict of laws analysis, the court held that “[t]he remedial purpose of our Workers’ Compensation Act supports application of its provisions in cases [in which] an injured employee seeks an award of benefits and Connecticut is the place of the injury, the place of the employment contract or the place of the employment relation.” Id., 195 .

1996We conclude that the conflict of laws rule recommended by the national commission and Professor Larson, adopted in the majority of jurisdictions, is the rule best suited to serve the purposes of our Workers' Compensation.' (Citations omitted; emphasis omitted.) Id. 192-3 .

2019"In determining the governing law, a forum applies its own [conflict of laws] rules ...." Gibson v. Fullin , 172 Conn. 407 , 411, 374 A.2d 1061 (1977).

2019"In determining the governing law, a forum applies its own [conflict of laws] rules ...." Gibson v. Fullin , 172 Conn. 407 , 411, 374 A.2d 1061 (1977).

2009Our reading of Ciampittiello also is buttressed by the fact that, when the decision was released in 1947, there was no legalized gambling in this state. 10 Furthermore, not only had “[Repeated efforts to legalize parimutuel betting in [Connecticut] . . . failed”; id., 55 ; but betting on horse racing was actually a crime under General Statutes (1930 Rev.) § 6316.

1999"A motion to strike is properly granted if the CT Page 14047 complaint alleges mere conclusions of law that are unsupported by the facts alleged." Novametrix Medical Systems Inc. v. BOC Group, Inc., 224 Conn. 210 , 215 , 618 A.2d 25 (1992); see also Faulkner v. United Technologies Corp., 240 Conn. 576 , 533, 693 A.2d 293 (1997).

1999"A motion to strike is properly granted if the CT Page 14047 complaint alleges mere conclusions of law that are unsupported by the facts alleged." Novametrix Medical Systems Inc. v. BOC Group, Inc., 224 Conn. 210 , 215 , 618 A.2d 25 (1992); see also Faulkner v. United Technologies Corp., 240 Conn. 576 , 533, 693 A.2d 293 (1997).

1991According to Professor Larson, this rule has introduced “a much greater degree of uniformity and compatibility . . . into this formerly-ragged area of the law.” 4 A. Larson, supra, § 87.11, p. 16-67. 8 We conclude that the conflict of laws rule recommended by the national commission and Professor Larson, adopted in the majority of jurisdictions, is the rule best suited to serve the purposes of our Workers’ Compensation Act. “ ‘The purpose of the workmen’s compensation statute is to compensate the worker for injuries arising out of and in the course of employment, without regard to fault, by im

1991According to Professor Larson, this rule has introduced “a much greater degree of uniformity and compatibility . . . into this formerly-ragged area of the law.” 4 A. Larson, supra, § 87.11, p. 16-67. 8 We conclude that the conflict of laws rule recommended by the national commission and Professor Larson, adopted in the majority of jurisdictions, is the rule best suited to serve the purposes of our Workers’ Compensation Act. “ ‘The purpose of the workmen’s compensation statute is to compensate the worker for injuries arising out of and in the course of employment, without regard to fault, by im

1991The act is to be broadly construed to effectuate the purpose of providing compensation ‘for an injury arising out of and in the course of the employment regardless of fault.’ Klapproth v. Turner, 156 Conn. 276, 279 , 240 A.2d 886 (1968) The purposes of the act itself are best served by allowing the remedial legislation a reasonable sphere of operation considering those purposes.

1991The act is to be broadly construed to effectuate the purpose of providing compensation ‘for an injury arising out of and in the course of the employment regardless of fault.’ Klapproth v. Turner, 156 Conn. 276, 279 , 240 A.2d 886 (1968) The purposes of the act itself are best served by allowing the remedial legislation a reasonable sphere of operation considering those purposes.