Orzech v. Giacco Oil Co.
208 Conn. App. 275
| Conn. App. Ct. | 2021Background
- On November 1, 2016 the decedent slipped while delivering oil for Giacco Oil Company and sustained back, right shoulder, and knee injuries; he later sought a right total knee replacement.
- Decedent’s health insurance was canceled about 30 days after the work incident, he could not afford surgery, and he filed a workers’ compensation claim for the knee replacement.
- On July 23, 2017 the decedent was found dead; the OCME ruled cause of death acute intoxication (alcohol plus several medications) and manner of death suicide.
- The Workers’ Compensation Commissioner found the decedent developed depression after the compensable injuries, that those injuries were a substantial contributing factor in the depression, and that the depression caused the suicide; the commissioner awarded survivorship benefits under § 31-306.
- The employer/insurer challenged the findings before the Compensation Review Board and on appeal, arguing (inter alia) that the decedent’s ingestion of alcohol and medications was a superseding cause (relying on Sapko v. State).
- The board affirmed the commissioner; this court likewise affirmed, concluding the factual findings were supported by the record and that the intoxication was the method of suicide rather than an intervening superseding cause.
Issues
| Issue | Orzech's Argument | Giacco's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Causation: whether decedent’s suicide is compensable as a sequela of work injuries | Work injuries caused chronic pain, loss of function, and depression, which proximately led to suicide | Evidence did not support significant, work-related depression or that death was suicide | Affirmed: commissioner’s factual findings (depression, causal link, suicide) were reasonable and supported by evidence |
| Superseding cause: whether alcohol/medication ingestion broke the causal chain | The manner (alcohol + meds) was the means of suicide tied to depression from compensable injuries, not an independent superseding act | Excessive drinking/overdose was an independent intervening act (analogous to Sapko) that broke causation | Distinguished Sapko (accidental overdose there); here the act was suicide tied to work-related depression, so it did not supersede and compensability stands |
Key Cases Cited
- Sapko v. State, 305 Conn. 360 (2012) (adopted the "direct and natural consequence" rule and applied the superseding-cause analysis to subsequent-injury causation)
- Coughlin v. Stamford Fire Dept., 334 Conn. 857 (2020) (expert medical opinion required to link compensable injury to subsequent injury when causation is not common knowledge)
- Vitti v. Milford, 190 Conn. App. 398 (2019) (standard of review: commissioner is sole arbiter of credibility and factual inferences)
- Wilder v. Russell Library Co., 107 Conn. 56 (1927) (recognizes compensability of suicide as sequela of a compensable injury in appropriate circumstances)
- Dixon v. United Illuminating Co., 57 Conn. App. 51 (2000) (appellate recognition that suicide can be compensable when causally connected to work injury)