152 Conn.App. 116
Conn. App. Ct.2014Background
- Kinsey, a long‑term recipient of temporary total disability and COLA payments, experienced repeated delays and a 73‑day failure to pay COLA in 2011; respondents World PAC and insurer later cured past‑due payments.
- Kinsey sought sanctions, interest, and attorney’s fees; after informal and preformal hearings respondents paid arrearages and issued a $1500 check but Kinsey pursued a formal hearing for sanctions and fees.
- At the formal hearing Kinsey sought sanctions under §31‑288 and fees/interest under §31‑300; hearing notices identified §31‑300 but did not expressly cite §31‑288.
- The commissioner found respondents had unduly delayed payments, awarded modest interest and $525 in attorney’s fees for the preformal hearing, declined to award paralegal fees (concluding no statutory authority), denied §31‑288 sanctions for lack of notice, and refused fees for time spent after the informal hearing as unreasonable.
- The Workers’ Compensation Review Board affirmed the commissioner; Kinsey appealed to the Appellate Court challenging (1) exclusion of paralegal fees, (2) denial of §31‑288 sanctions for lack of notice, (3) refusal to award fees for time pursuing sanctions, and (4) the commissioner’s refusal to recuse for knowledge of settlement discussions.
Issues
| Issue | Kinsey’s Argument | World PAC’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether "reasonable attorney’s fees" under §§31‑300 and 31‑327(b) may include paralegal fees | "Reasonable attorney’s fees" is a legal term of art that includes work performed by supervised non‑attorneys (paralegals); commissioner has discretion to include them | Statutes refer to "attorneys" and enumerated categories; prior board decisions excluded paralegal/witness fees absent express statutory authorization | Reversed commissioner on this point: paralegal fees may be included within "reasonable attorney’s fees" at commissioner’s discretion; remanded for proceedings on paralegal fees |
| Whether §31‑288 sanctions could be imposed despite lack of express statutory citation in hearing notice | Notice was sufficient (formal hearing request sought sanctions generally; respondents knew sanctions were at issue) | Lack of explicit §31‑288 notice deprived respondents of fair opportunity to prepare; commissioner permissibly limited relief to §31‑300 | Affirmed: commissioner properly declined §31‑288 sanctions because notices did not fairly apprise respondents and no prejudice‑curing explanation in record |
| Whether attorney’s fees for time spent pursuing sanctions after informal hearing must be awarded | Commissioner must award fees for all time reasonably spent to obtain deterrent sanctions; cannot arbitrarily cut off compensation at a date | Commissioner reasonably exercised discretion to deny fees for post‑informal work here given minimal attorney time and prior settlement offer covering that period | Affirmed: awarding fees is discretionary; commissioner’s determination that post‑informal fees were unreasonable was not an abuse of discretion |
| Whether commissioner’s awareness of settlement discussions required recusal | Awareness/use of settlement evidence tainted impartiality; recusal required to protect due process | Settlement evidence was relevant to reasonableness of fee award; no evidence of bias and recusal was unwarranted | Affirmed: admitting settlement evidence was permissible for fee/sanction assessment and no recusal was required absent evidence of bias |
Key Cases Cited
- Missouri v. Jenkins, 491 U.S. 274 (paralegal work may be compensated as part of a "reasonable attorney’s fee")
- Sorrentino v. All Seasons Servs., Inc., 245 Conn. 756 (trial court cannot sua sponte penalize billing for nonattorneys absent basis; nonattorney billing not per se unreasonable)
- Jutkowitz v. Dept. of Health Servs., 220 Conn. 86 (administrative consideration of settlement offers may be improper where used during case‑in‑chief)
- McFarland v. Dept. of Dev. Servs., 115 Conn. App. 306 (standard of review: commissioner fact‑finding given deference; fee awards within commissioner’s discretion)