5389 CRB-7-08-10(2009). Mehan v. City of Stamford.
Court | Connecticut |
Connecticut Workers Compensation
2009.
5389 CRB-7-08-10(2009).
Mehan v. City of Stamford
CASE NO.5389
CRB-7-08-10COMPENSATION REVIEW BOARD
WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 14, 2009EDWARD MEHAN CLAIMANT-APPELLEE v. CITY
OF STAMFORD EMPLOYER SELF-INSURED RESPONDENT-APPELLANT and PMA MANAGEMENT CORP.
OF NEW ENGLAND ADMINISTRATORAPPEARANCES: The claimant was represented by Daniel A.
Benjamin, Esq., Benjamin & Gold, 350 Bedford Street, Suite 403, Stamford,
CT 06901. The respondent was represented by Scott Wilson Williams, Esq., and
James Moran, Esq., Maher & Williams, 268 Post Road, P.O. Box 550,
Fairfield, CT 06824. These Petitions for Review from the October 13, 2008
Ruling on Claimant's Motion to Preclude dated March 14, 2008 and on
Respondent's Opposition to Claimant's Motion to Preclude dated June 25, 2008 as
well as the October 16, 2008 Finding and Award of the Commissioner acting for
the Seventh District were heard April 24, 2009 before a Compensation Review
Board panel consisting of the Commission Chairman John A. Mastropietro and
Commissioners Peter C. Mlynarczyk and Randy L. Cohen.OPINION JOHN
A. MASTROPIETRO, CHAIRMAN. This appeal focuses on whether the trial
commissioner properly determined that a Motion to Preclude should be granted
and what effect this Motion to Preclude would have on the case in light of the
Supreme Court's decision in Harpaz v. Laidlaw Transit, Inc., 286 Conn. 102
(2008). The respondent argues that due to irregularities in the manner in which
the Form 30C was filed that the trial commissioner should not have determined
this notice commenced the time frame to file a disclaimer. The respondent also
argues that the trial commissioner did not accord it a proper chance to defend
the claim and should not have found the claimant presented a prima facia case.
In light of the Supreme Court's decision in Donahue v. Veridiem, Inc., 291
Conn. 537 (2009), we believe the trial commissioner reached the legally correct
decision in this matter. We affirm the Finding and Award and dismiss this
appeal.The trial commissioner reached the following findings in her
Finding and Award of October 16, 2008. She had previously ruled on July 25,
2007 that the claimant's Form 30C had been properly filed. She also noted an
October 13, 2008 ruling on the claimant's motion to preclude which applied the
Harpaz decision to this case, and granted preclusion due to an untimely Form
43. She found that on February 10, 2001, the claimant was employed by the
respondent as a fire fighter and on that date, the claimant suffered chest pain
while fighting a fire and was subsequently taken to Stamford Hospital for
treatment.
The commissioner determined that the claimant did not suffer an
infarction on February 10, 2001 based on the results of hospital tests and a
catheterization. After his February 10, 2001 event, the claimant had more
frequent episodes of chest pain. The claimant had been treating with Dr. Joseph
Costanza for hypertension prior to his February 10, 2001 cardiac event. He last
treated with Dr. Costanza on January 2, 2001.
Following the February 2001 cardiac event the claimant had a
cardiac catheterization with Dr. Robert Labarre,(fn1) his treating physician.
The claimant was advised that he had coronary artery disease after the
catheterization. In October of 2002, he was found to be physically unfit for
active duty as a fireman. The claimant had stents inserted into his chest in
May of 2003 and December of 2003. He retired in 2003 after he was found
physically unfit for active duty.
Dr. Labarre opined on a number of occasions as to the claimant's
condition. On September 26, 2005 Dr. Labarre described the claimant's February
10, 2001 work-related injury as an "acute coronary syndrome." He describes the
syndrome as "insufficient blood flow via the coronary arteries to the heart"
and states that "[i]t is reasonably likely that Mr. Mehan's heart exertion
while fire fighting on 2/10/2001 precipitated his acute coronary syndrome." Dr.
Labarre opined in a January 23, 2008 deposition that, to a reasonable degree of
medical probability that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial