Tosado v. Administrator, Unemployment Compensation Act
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
****************************************************** The officially released date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the officially released date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the officially released date. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ****************************************************** EDDIE C. TOSADO v. ADMINISTRATOR, UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION ACT, ET AL. (AC 32401) Lavine, Robinson and Lavery, Js. Argued April 21 officially released July 19, 2011 (Appeal from Superior Court, judicial district of New Haven, Hon. Robert I. Berdon, judge trial referee.) Krista Dolson O Brien, assistant attorney general, with whom, on the brief, were Richard Blumental, former attorney general, and Philip M. Schulz, assistant attorney, for the appellant (named defendant). Eddie C. Tosado, pro se, the appellee (plaintiff). Opinion ROBINSON, J. The named defendant, the administrator of the Unemployment Compensation Act,1 appeals from the judgment of the Superior Court sustaining the appeal by the plaintiff, Eddie C. Tosado, from the determination of the employment security board of review (board) denying the plaintiff unemployment compensation benefits. On appeal, the defendant claims that the court improperly determined that the board s factual findings did not support the board s conclusion that the plaintiff was discharged for wilful misconduct. We agree and, accordingly, reverse the judgment of the trial court. In the related case of Tosado v. Administrator, Unemployment Compensation Act, 130 Conn. App. 266 A.3d (2011), we addressed the claim of error raised by the present appeal. We adopt the reasoning and conclusion of that opinion to resolve the present appeal. The judgment is reversed and the case is remanded with direction to render judgment for the defendant. In this opinion the other judges concurred. 1 We note that the defendant, The Wellpoint Companies, Inc., filed a separate appeal from the judgment of the trial court. See Tosado v. Administartor, Unemployment Compensation Act, 130 Conn. App. 266, A.3d (2011). We refer to the administrator of the Unemployment Compensation Act as the defendant in this opinion.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
