Cable v. Bic Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• whether Appellate Court correctly concluded that workers' compensation commissioner had employed relevant legal standard, even though he had not expressed standard used, presents question of law subject to plenary review
• whether Appellate Court correctly concluded that workers’ compensation commissioner had employed relevant legal standard, even though he had not expressed standard used, presents question of law subject to plenary review
• \[p]roper utilization of the motion for articulation serves to dispel any ... ambiguity by clarifying the factual and legal basis upon which the trial court rendered its decision\ [internal quotation marks omitted]
• “[pjroper utilization of the motion for articulation serves to dispel any . . . ambiguity by clarifying the factual and legal basis upon which the trial court rendered its decision” [internal quotation marks omitted]
• “[p]roper utilization of the motion for articulation serves to dispel any . . . ambiguity by clarifying the factual and legal basis upon which the trial court rendered its decision” [internal quotation marks omitted]

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).