5390 CRB-4-08-10 (2009). Cascella v. State of Connecticut Department of Correction.
Court | Connecticut |
Connecticut Workers Compensation
2009.
5390 CRB-4-08-10 (2009).
Cascella v. State of Connecticut Department of Correction
CASE NO.5390 CRB-4-08-10COMPENSATION REVIEW BOARD
WORKERS'
COMPENSATION COMMISSION OCTOBER 28, 2009RONALD CASCELLA CLAIMANT-APPELLEE v. STATE OF
CONNECTICUT/DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION EMPLOYER SELF-INSURED RESPONDENT-APPELLANT
and GAB ROBINS OF NORTH AMERICA, INC. ADMINISTRATORAPPEARANCES: The claimant was represented by Juliet
M. Nolta, Esq., 55 Corporate Drive, Trumbull, CT 06611. The respondent was
represented by Michael J. Belzer, Esq., Assistant Attorney General, 55 Elm
Street, P.O. Box 120, Hartford, CT 06141-0120. This Petition for Review from
the October 15, 2008 Finding and Award of the Commissioner acting for the
Fourth District was heard on April 24, 2009 before a Compensation Review Board
panel consisting of the Commission Chairman John A. Mastropietro and
Commissioners Peter C. Mlynarczyk and Christine L. Engel.OPINION JOHN
A. MASTROPIETRO, CHAIRMAN. The claimant has petitioned for review from
the October 15, 2008 Finding and Award of the Commissioner acting for the
Fourth District. We find error and accordingly reverse in part the decision of
the trial commissioner. Given that the issue upon which we reverse is
dispositive of the appeal, we therefore decline to reach the remaining
arguments propounded by the appellant.The following factual findings are pertinent to our review. The
claimant, an employee of the Department of Correction since July 23, 1993, was
working as a Correction Officer at the Bridgeport Community Correctional Center
on February 26, 1996. The claimant testified that his job responsibilities
consisted of inspecting his assigned unit, performing "facility counts," and
transporting inmates to activities such as classes, medical or counseling
appointments, and recreational programs. The claimant stated that "his number
one job duty . . . is to create a safe and humane environment for staff as well
as inmates to cohabitate." Findings, ¶ 13. On February 26, 1996, the
claimant was scheduled to work from 4:00 p.m. to 12:00 a.m. as a "rover," which
role required him to cover various areas of the facility while other officers
were on their meal breaks and to be available for emergency calls.
On the evening of February 26, 1996, a "code white" occurred in
the New Center Hospital, which is located within the correctional facility. A
"code white" signifies that an emergency is occurring, and at trial the
claimant explained that he was trained at the academy "to respond to a code as
quickly as possible, since a simple code could turn into the loss of a unit,
loss of control of a facility or a loss of someone's life." Findings, ¶
18. The claimant testified that he immediately responded to the code and was
instructed to go to the shower area in the hospital; he did so, and testified
that as he approached the showers, "the situation was confusing and alarming.
[The claimant] heard keys jingling, radios going off and directions being
yelled and screamed by officers." Findings, ¶ 21. When he arrived at the
scene, there were blood spatters on the wall and floor, and he saw that a
fellow correction officer was restraining an inmate by one arm which he had
pinned against the wall of the shower. The claimant testified that he did not
know what the inmate was doing with his other arm but was concerned that a
weapon might had been used because the inmate had cut himself.
The claimant testified that when he reached the shower area, he
was told to "glove up," which is a universal precaution officers are trained to
perform in order to avoid exposure to diseases which can be transmitted through
the transfer of bodily fluids. The claimant stated that as he slowed down to
put his gloves on, he stepped into a puddle on the floor of the shower area
which caused him to lose his footing. The claimant sustained a compensable
injury and subsequently underwent two surgeries on his lumbar spine. The
claimant is seeking temporary total disability benefits pursuant to §
5-142(a) C.G.S. (also known as hazardous duty pay) for the period immediately
following the injury between February 27, 1996 and August 27, 1996.(fn1) The
claimant is also seeking temporary total disability...
To continue reading
Request your trial