Bourassa v. State of Connecticut/Department of Corrections

The claimant was not represented at oral argument. At trial, he was represented by Scott N. Roberts, Esq., 349 Mitchell Street, P. O. Box 883, Groton, CT 06340.

The state was not represented at oral argument. At trial, it was represented by Taka Iwashita, Esq., Assistant Attorney General, 55 Elm St., P. O. Box 120, Hartford, CT 06141-0120.

This Petition for Review from the May 18, 1994 Finding and Award of the Commissioner acting for the Second District was heard March 24, 1995 before a Compensation Review Board panel consisting of the Commission Chairman Jesse M. Frankl and Commissioners Roberta S. D’Oyen and Amado J. Vargas.

DISMISSAL ORDER

JESSE M. FRANKL, CHAIRMAN. The State has petitioned for review from the May 18, 1994 Finding and Award of the Commissioner for the Second District. Although the petition for review was timely, to date we have received only the State’s Reasons of Appeal; neither a Motion to Correct nor a brief were filed, and the deadlines for filing those documents have passed. Because the Reasons for Appeal indicate that the State is challenging the commissioner’s findings on evidentiary grounds, the filing of a Motion to Correct is imperative in this case. We therefore dismiss the State’s appeal pursuant to Practice Book § 4055 for failure to prosecute with proper diligence. See Esquillin v. Pinto Lavado Enterprises, 13 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 148, 1914 CRB-2-93-12 (Feb. 1, 1995); Green v. Labor Force of America, Inc., 13 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 146, 1908 CRB-3-93-11 (Feb. 1, 1995); Burke v. Abacus Transfer & Storage, 13 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 19, 20, 1782 CRB-3-93-7 (Nov. 3, 1994).