State of Connecticut Workers' Compensation Commission, John A. Mastropietro, Chairman
Home News RSS News QUICK Find Index Search E-Mail
General Information Glossary Law CRB Opinions Workers' Compensation Commission Downloadable Forms and Publications Links

Carreira v. Data Mail

CASE NO. 1391 CRB-6-92-3

COMPENSATION REVIEW BOARD

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION

NOVEMBER 18, 1993

MARIA CARREIRA

CLAIMANT-APPELLANT

v.

DATA MAIL

EMPLOYER

RESPONDENT-APPELLEE

APPEARANCES:

The claimant was represented by John P. Giovannucci, Esq., 107 Oak Street, Hartford, CT 06106 who filed a brief but did not appear at oral argument.

The respondent was represented by Bruce Mandell, Esq., c/o Data Mail, 240 Hartford Avenue, Newington, CT 06111 and Lawrence Shipman, Esq., One Torrington Office Plaza, P.O. Box 779, Torrington, CT 06790 who appeared at oral argument but did not file a brief.

This Petition for Review from the February 20, 1992 Finding and Dismissal of the Acting Commissioner for the Sixth District was heard February 26, 1993 before a Compensation Review Board panel consisting of the Commission Chairman Jesse Frankl and Commissioners George Waldron and Donald Doyle, Jr.

OPINION

JESSE FRANKL, CHAIRMAN. The claimant has petitioned for review from the February 20, 1992 Finding and Dismissal of the Acting Commissioner for the Sixth District. In that Finding and Dismissal, the trial commissioner dismissed the claimant’s claim that the respondent-employer violated General Statutes Sec. 31-290a which prohibits discrimination against claimants who pursue their rights under our Workers’ Compensation Act.

In Rondini v. Tectonic Industries, 10 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 210, 1231 CRD-6-91-5 (1992), we held that the Compensation Review Board lacks jurisdiction over appeals relating to Sec. 31-290a claims. Rondini referred to Sec. 31-290a(b), which provides in pertinent part that “[a]ny party aggrieved by the decision of the commissioner may appeal the decision to the appellate court.” The Rondini panel concluded that “appellate court” referred to the Appellate Court of our state.

We have subsequently followed Rondini and dismissed appeals under circumstances identical to those presented by this case. See Erisoty v. Merrow Machine Company, 11 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 131, 1639 CRB-6-93-2 (1993); Ayres v. United Methodist Homes of Connecticut, Inc., 11 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 113, 1670 CRD-4-93-3 (1993); Krajewski v. Atlantic Aerospace, 11 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 54, 1387 CRD-6-92-2 (1993); Thorpe v. Ducci Electric Co., 10 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 245, 1235 CRD-6-91-5 (1993).

We, therefore, dismiss the claimant’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Commissioners George A. Waldron and Donald H. Doyle, Jr. concur.

Workers’ Compensation Commission

Page last revised: March 22, 2016

Page URL: http://wcc.state.ct.us/crb/1993/1391crb.htm

Workers’ Compensation Commission Disclaimer, Privacy Policy and Website Accessibility

State of Connecticut Workers' Compensation Commission, John A. Mastropietro, Chairman
Home News RSS News QUICK Find Index Search E-Mail
General Information Glossary Law CRB Opinions Workers' Compensation Commission Downloadable Forms and Publications Links