132 Conn. App. 794
Conn. App. Ct.2012Background
- Plaintiff seeks CT workers’ compensation benefits for decedent, who died after an August 4, 2005 New York motor vehicle injury while en route to NY-based sales meetings.
- Decedent was NJ-employee of Lightolier (Genlyte Thomas Group) with NY sales territory; CT had no formal territory for him.
- Contract entered in New Jersey; injury place was New York; CT residency did not create CT employment relationship.
- Employer provided CT-relevant tools (basement home office, laptop, cell phone) but use was for personal convenience and not CT-directed.
- Travel policies treated home-to-first-call travel as nonreimbursable commuting, and there is no evidence CT was place of employment or required CT residence for tax purposes.
- Commissioner concluded CT law did not apply due to lack of significant relationship between CT and the employment relationship, a ruling affirmed by the board.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether CT has a significant relationship to the employment in dispute | Baron argues CT relationship exists via home office and occasional CT work | Lightolier contends no significant CT link to contract/relation | CT law does not apply; no significant CT relationship found |
| Whether the three-part Cleveland/Burse test supports CT law application | Plaintiff relies on significant-relationship standard | Defendant argues lack of CT connection under test | Board/commissioner findings upholding no CT law applicability |
Key Cases Cited
- Cleveland v. U.S. Printing Ink, Inc., 218 Conn. 181 (1991) (establishes multi-factor test for choice of law in workers’ compensation)
- Burse v. American International Airways, Inc., 262 Conn. 31 (2002) (requires showing a significant relationship to CT for apply CT law)
- Jaiguay v. Vasquez, 287 Conn. 323 (2008) (clarifies test applies to workers’ compensation, not tort claims)
- Johnson v. Atkinson, 283 Conn. 243 (2007) (early articulation of exclusive remedy and choice-of-law considerations)
- Williams v. State, 124 Conn. App. 759 (2010) (standard for reviewing commissioner’s findings)