Suarez v. Dickmont Plastics Corp.

229 Conn. 99, 639 A.2d 507 (1994)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Suarez v. Dickmont Plastics Corp.

Connecticut Supreme Court
229 Conn. 99, 639 A.2d 507 (1994)

Facts

Alfonso Suarez (plaintiff) was injured while clearing molten plastic out of a molding machine in the course of his employment with Dickmont Plastics Corporation (Dickmont) (defendant). Two fingers on Suarez’s right hand were partially amputated, resulting in permanent loss of function. Suarez sued Dickmont, alleging that Dickmont engaged in willful misconduct by (1) requiring Suarez and his coworkers, over their objections, to clean the molding machine while it was in operation; (2) refusing to let Suarez and his coworkers use safer methods for cleaning the machine; and (3) refusing to equip the machine with a protective cover to prevent workers from being injured while cleaning or operating it. Suarez stated that his foreman told him that if Suarez did not clean the machinery as directed, he would be fired. In opposition to Dickmont’s motion for summary judgment, Suarez proffered a report and affidavit of a physical engineer, Michael Shanok, who argued that Dickmont’s conduct violated accepted safety standards. Shanok opined that Dickmont’s actions crossed the line between gross negligence and reckless disregard for the safety of employees and that there was no sign of even the slightest consideration for Suarez’s safety. Shanok also stated that it was clear that an injury like Suarez’s would sooner or later be a predictable and probable event. The trial court entered summary judgment in favor of Dickmont, and the appellate court affirmed. Suarez appealed, and the Connecticut Supreme Court granted his petition for certification.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Katz, J.)

Concurrence/Dissent (Borden, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership