Paranko v. State

In Paranko v. State, 200 Conn. 51, 509 A.2d 508 (1986), the issue the court addressed was whether an individual union member could compel arbitration, pursuant to 52-410, under the terms of a collective bargaining agreement between the state and the individual's employee union. The court stated that "the clear purpose of 52-410 is to provide the 'parties' to an arbitration agreement with an enforcement mechanism by permitting them to invoke the court's equitable powers. The statute limits the availability of the remedy to 'parties,' but the word is not defined. The term is used generically, referring to anyone who has contracted with another to arbitrate their disputes. The meaning must therefore be derived from the agreement itself." Id. at 54.