143 Conn. App. 313
Conn. App. Ct.2013Background
- Officer Perun slipped on ice in his driveway while approaching his vehicle to depart for work.
- He still proceeded to a 7:45 a.m. roll call after the accident and filed an accident report the next day.
- City of Danbury denied the claim, arguing the injury did not arise out of and in the course of employment and occurred at the employee’s abode.
- The workers’ compensation commissioner ruled for Perun, holding that departure to duty and return encompassed his employment and that § 31-275(E)(i) did not apply to police officers.
- The Board reversed, concluding that § 31-275(E)(i) bars compensation for injuries at the abode when not directed by the employer and that it should apply to police officers.
- The Supreme Court affirmed the Board, holding that while the commute is part of the course of employment, an injury in the driveway before crossing the threshold is not within the course of employment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does a police officer's commute fall within the course of employment? | Perun: commute is within course of employment under § 31-275(A)(i). | City: commute injuries may occur at abode and are not within the course of employment. | Commute is part of employment, but driveway injury not within course |
| Does § 31-275(E)(i) preclude compensation for injuries at the employee's place of abode? | E(i) does not bar police officer claims; exception applies to officers only for abode injuries limited by context. | E(i) bars abode injuries absent employer-directed acts, even for police. | E(i) applies to abode injuries; not compensable when injury occurs at abode without employer direction |
| What constitutes 'place of abode' and does driveway fall within it? | Driveway is within place of abode under F; injuries there may be compensable. | Place of abode includes driveway but requires behavior tied to employment and direction. | Place of abode includes driveway; injury in driveway before entering duty not in course of employment |
Key Cases Cited
- Fine Homebuilders, Inc. v. Perrone, 98 Conn. App. 852 (2006) (addressed place of abode definitions under § 31-275(E)(i) and (F))
- Pasquariello v. Stop & Shop Cos., 281 Conn. 656 (2007) (provides context on statutory interpretation and board deference)
- Labadie v. Norwalk Rehabilitation Services, Inc., 274 Conn. 219 (2005) (two-part test: existence and course of employment; portal-to-portal coverage)
- Martone v. Lensink, 207 Conn. 296 (1988) (statutory reading and relationship among subparts)
- Pizzuto v. Commissioner of Mental Retardation, 283 Conn. 257 (2007) (affirms plenary review of statutory interpretation)