Gudo v. Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund

How courts have described this case

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

• determining whether claimant presented sufficient evidence that his coronary artery disease was occupational disease
• claims for injuries resulting from repetitive trauma subject to same one year limitation period as claims for accidental injuries
• claims for injuries resulting from repetitive trauma subject to same one year limitation period as claims for accidental injuries
• claims of injuries resulting from repetitive trauma subject to same one year limitation period as claims for accidental injuries
• \[c]ompliance with [§ 31-294c] is essential to maintaining a claim for compensation under chapter 568 and therefore under ... § 7-433c... because timely notice is a jurisdictional requirement that cannot be waived\ [internal quotation marks omitted]
• in enacting § 7-433c, legislature intended ‘‘to afford the named occupations with a bonus . . . when, under the appro- priate conditions, the employee suffered heart disease or hypertension’’ [emphasis added]

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).