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

Fritz v. Gravymaster, Inc.

CASE NO. 1462 CRB-3-92-7

COMPENSATION REVIEW BOARD

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION

MARCH 15, 1994

KAREN FRITZ

CLAIMANT-APPELLANT

v.

GRAVYMASTER, INC.

EMPLOYER

and

CHUBB INSURANCE

INSURER

RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES

APPEARANCES:

The claimant was represented by Richard L. Gross, Esq., Cantor, Floman, Russell & Gross, 378 Boston Post Road, P.O. Drawer 966, Orange, CT 06477.

The respondents were represented by Richard G. Kascak, Jr., Esq., Mihaly, Mihaly & Kascak, 925 White Plains Road, Trumbull, CT 06611.

This Petition for Review from the July 15, 1992 Finding and Award of the Commissioner At Large acting for the Third District was heard April 30, 1993 before a Compensation Review Board panel consisting of Commissioners John Arcudi, James J. Metro and Angelo L. dos Santos.

OPINION

JOHN ARCUDI, COMMISSIONER. The trier found claimant suffered a compensable injury from exposure to poor air exchange at her place of employment January 1989 through November 6, 1989, identified as “Tight Building Syndrome.” However, he rejected her claim that she suffers from a work-related injury or occupational disease known as Multiple Chemical Sensitivity Syndrome, finding she “is suffering from atopic or allergic disease with seasonal hay fever and nasal congestion as well as chronic anxiety with hyperventilation syndrome which is not work-related.”

She seeks certain corrections to the finding and bases her contention on some factual allegations clearly in dispute. Other allegations seem to be based on undisputed evidence. However, a trier’s findings will not be changed if the requested correction would not alter the legal conclusion. Hill v. Pitney Bowes Inc., 8 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 98, 832 CRD-7-89-3 (1990).

She argues the trial commissioner should have concluded that her condition was work-related. But, the conclusion reached by the trial commissioner depended upon the weight and credibility accorded the evidence. We will not disturb conclusions so based. Neal v. UTC/Pratt & Whitney, 10 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 163, 1199 CRD-8-91-3 (1992). It was the province of the trier to resolve any inconsistencies or contradictions in the evidence. See Miller v. Kirshner, 225 Conn. 185, 198-99 (1993); Pereira v. State of Connecticut/Department of Children and Youth Services. 10 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 229, 1209 CRD-7-91-4 (1993). As the conclusions reached from the facts found did not result from incorrect applications of law or from inferences illegally or unreasonably drawn, those conclusions must stand. Fair v. People’s Savings Bank, 207 Conn. 535, 539 (1988).

We, therefore, affirm the trial commissioner and deny the appeal.

Commissioners James J. Metro and Angelo L. dos Santos concur.

Workers’ Compensation Commission

Page last revised: October 29, 2015

Page URL: http://wcc.state.ct.us/crb/1994/1462crb.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