Puchala v. Connecticut Abatement Technologies et al.

CASE NO. 4232 CRB-4-00-4

COMPENSATION REVIEW BOARD

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION

JANUARY 30, 2002

CARL PUCHALA, JR.

CLAIMANT-APPELLEE

v.

CONNECTICUT ABATEMENT TECHNOLOGIES

EMPLOYER

NO RECORD OF INSURANCE

RESPONDENT-APPELLANT

and

PRAIRIE LAND CONTRACTING

EMPLOYER

and

TRAVELERS PROPERTY & CASUALTY

INSURER

RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES

and

CHERRY HILL CONTRACTORS

EMPLOYER

and

VALLEY FORGE INSURANCE CO./CAN

INSURER

RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES

and

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING GROUP, INC.

EMPLOYER

and

LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.

INSURER

RESPONDENTS-APPELLEES

and

SECOND INJURY FUND

RESPONDENT-APPELLEE

DISMISSAL OF APPEAL

The respondent employer Connecticut Abatement Technologies has petitioned for review from the April 3, 2000 “Decision Re: Remand from CRB” of the Commissioner acting for the Fourth District. Subsequent to the filing of its appeal, the claimant’s claim was settled pursuant to a Full and Final Stipulation which was approved by the Commissioner acting for the Fourth District on June 26, 2001. As the appeal is now moot, and the respondent appellant has not withdrawn its appeal as requested, we therefore will dismiss the appeal. See Gawlik v. Stanley Hand Tools, 4303 CRB-6-00-10 (June 6, 2001), citing Kovac v. Kecko Piping Company, 3806 CRB-4-98-4 (Oct. 2, 1998); Johnson v. Manchester Bus Service, Inc., 3863 CRB-1-98-8 (Aug. 5, 1998).

The appeal is therefore dismissed.

John A. Mastropietro, Chairman

Compensation Review Board

Workers’ Compensation Commission