209 Conn.App. 540
Conn. App. Ct.2021Background
- Reid filed a Form 30C on May 5, 2010, claiming a December 31, 2009 right-shoulder injury from shoveling snow at Speer’s property.
- Speer did not file a Form 43 contesting liability within 28 days after receiving notice; Reid moved to preclude on August 20, 2010.
- The Workers’ Compensation Commissioner found Reid’s relationship with Speer had evolved from independent contractor to employee, that the injury (if proven) was compensable, and granted the motion to preclude, barring Speer from contesting liability or offering exculpatory evidence.
- The Compensation Review Board affirmed; Speer (self-represented) appealed, arguing among other things that filing Form 43 would have been criminal under § 31-290c because she allegedly knew Reid’s claim was fraudulent.
- The Appellate Court affirmed the board, finding record support for the commissioner’s credibility and factual findings and rejecting Speer’s claim that filing a Form 43 would have constituted criminal conduct.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Employment status / compensability | Reid: injury occurred in course of employment and he was an employee | Speer: Reid was an independent contractor; no compensable injury | Commissioner’s factual findings that Reid was an employee and the injury was compensable are supported by the record and affirmed |
| Preclusion for failure to file Form 43 | Reid: Speer’s failure to timely file Form 43 triggers statutory preclusion | Speer: she could not lawfully have filed Form 43 | Preclusion was properly granted where Speer failed to timely file Form 43 |
| Criminality of filing Form 43 under § 31-290c | Reid: contesting liability via Form 43 is lawful | Speer: filing Form 43 would have aided fraud and been criminal under § 31-290c | Rejected — filing Form 43 to contest liability is not criminal under § 31-290c and Speer provided no legal support for her theory |
| Reviewability of commissioner’s findings | Reid: commissioner entitled to deference on facts/credibility | Speer: commissioner erred in fact-finding and credibility assessments | Appellate deference applies; findings and credibility determinations are sustained where supported by evidence |
Key Cases Cited
- Jones v. Connecticut Children’s Medical Center Faculty Practice Plan, 131 Conn. App. 415 (Conn. App. 2011) (standards of review and deference to commissioner)
- Leonetti v. MacDermid, Inc., 310 Conn. 195 (Conn. 2013) (interpretation of § 31-290c criminalizing fraudulent claims)
- Sapko v. State, 305 Conn. 360 (Conn. 2012) (tests for "arising out of" and "in the course of" employment)
- Standard Oil of Connecticut, Inc. v. Administrator, Unemployment Compensation Act, 320 Conn. 611 (Conn. 2016) (right-to-control test for employee vs. independent contractor)
- Dominguez v. New York Sports Club, 198 Conn. App. 854 (Conn. App. 2020) (motion to preclude as statutory waiver mechanism under § 31-294c)
- Wiblyi v. McDonald’s Corp., 168 Conn. App. 92 (Conn. App. 2016) (forms 30C/43 and timing for contesting liability)