CASE NO. 2095 CRB-2-94-7
COMPENSATION REVIEW BOARD
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION
DECEMBER 5, 1995
GRANDE EAST CONSTRUCTION
EMPLOYERS INS. OF WAUSAU
The claimant was not present at oral argument, and is conducting his appeal pro se.
The respondents were represented by William C. Brown, Esq., McGann, Bartlett & Brown, 281 Hartford Tpke., Vernon, CT 06066.
This Petition for Review from the July 6, 1994 Finding of the Commissioner acting for the Second District was heard April 21, 1995 before a Compensation Review Board panel consisting of the Commission Chairman Jesse M. Frankl and Commissioners Amado J. Vargas and Michael S. Miles.
JESSE M. FRANKL, CHAIRMAN. The pro se claimant petitioned for review from the July 6, 1994 Finding of the Commissioner acting for the Second District. To date, he has filed no documents in support of his appeal, including Reasons of Appeal, a Motion to Correct, or a brief, nor has he requested an extension of time to file any of these documents. We must therefore dismiss the appeal for failure to prosecute with proper diligence pursuant to Practice Book § 4055. See Esquillin v. Pinto Lavado Enterprises, 13 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 148, 1914 CRB-2-93-12 (Feb. 1, 1995); Burke v. Abacus Transfer & Storage, 13 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 19, 1782 CRB-3-93-7 (Nov. 3, 1994).
We also note that the pro se claimant has appealed from a decision founded on the trial commissioner’s determination that his testimony was not credible. This board cannot make decisions as to whether a witness’ testimony is believable or not; that is solely the job of the trial commissioner. Webb v. Pfizer, Inc., 1859 CRB-5-93-9 (decided May 12, 1995). If the commissioner decides not to believe what a witness is saying, the CRB is in no position to say that she made a mistake.
The claimant’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Practice Book § 4055.
Commissioners Amado J. Vargas and Michael S. Miles concur.