You have reached the original website of the |
CRB OPINIONS AND ANNOTATIONS |
CASE NO. 2184 CRB-5-94-10
COMPENSATION REVIEW BOARD
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION
MAY 9, 1996
JAMES SALVATORE
CLAIMANT-APPELLEE
v.
SALTER’S EXPRESS CO., INC.
EMPLOYER
INTERNATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY
INSURER
RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES
and
SECOND INJURY FUND
RESPONDENT-APPELLANT
APPEARANCES:
The claimant did not appear at oral argument.
Respondent employer and insurer were represented by Joanne Belisle, Esq., Montstream & May, 655 Winding Brook Dr., Glastonbury CT 06033.The respondent Second Injury Fund was represented by Taka Iwashita, Esq., and Michael Belzer, Esq., Assistant Attorney General, 55 Elm St., P.O. Box 120, Hartford, CT 06141-0120.
This Petition for Review from the October 13, 1994 Finding and Award of the Commissioner acting for the Fifth District was heard June 23, 1995 before a Compensation Review Board panel consisting of the Commission Chairman Jesse M. Frankl and Commissioners Roberta Smith Tracy and Michael S. Miles.
JESSE M. FRANKL, CHAIRMAN. The respondent Second Injury Fund has petitioned for review from the October 13, 1994 Finding and Award of the Commissioner for the Fifth District. The Second Injury Fund (hereinafter “Fund”) contends in its reasons of appeal that the trial commissioner improperly ordered the transfer of the claim pursuant to § 31-349 C.G.S. The respondents have filed a timely motion to dismiss the Fund’s appeal.
Pursuant to the Compensation Review Board Calendar issued on March 8, 1995, briefs of appellants were required to be filed on or before May 1, 1995. The Fund has not filed a legal brief with this board. On May 17, 1994, in response to the respondents’ motion to dismiss for failure to file a brief, the Fund did not file a legal brief, but rather requested that this board refer to the legal arguments in its proposed findings which it had filed at the trial level. As the Fund has failed to file a timely brief, we will dismiss the appeal for failure to prosecute with proper diligence pursuant to Practice Book § 4055. See Lennon v. Genest Subaru Motors, 13 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 63, 1589 CRB-5-92-12 (Dec. 28, 1994); Divita v. Thames Valley Steel, 12 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 50, 1541 CRB-2-92-10 (Jan. 26, 1994); Vigneri v. Utility Industrial Company, 12 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 402, 1433 CRB-2-92-6 (Sept. 9, 1994) (where appellant fails to file a brief, issues on appeal are deemed abandoned).
Accordingly, we will not consider the merits of the Fund’s appeal in this case.
The Fund’s appeal is dismissed.
Commissioners Roberta Smith Tracy and Michael S. Miles concur.
You have reached the original website of the |
CRB OPINIONS AND ANNOTATIONS |