Any party aggrieved by the decision of the Compensation Review Board upon any question or questions of law arising in the proceedings may appeal the decision of the Compensation Review Board to the Appellate Court, whether or not the decision is a final decision within the meaning of section
4-183 or a final judgment within the meaning of section
52-263.
(P.A. 79-540, S. 5; June Sp. Sess. P.A. 83-29, S. 15, 82; P.A. 91-339, S. 22, 55; P.A. 09-178, S. 1.)
History: June Sp. Sess. P.A. 83-29 deleted reference to appellate session of the superior court and included reference to appellate court; P.A. 91-339 changed “compensation review division” to “compensation review board”; P.A. 09-178 added provision re appeal to Appellate Court whether or not decision is a final decision or a final judgment, effective June 30, 2009.
Cited. 193 C. 59; 206 C. 242; 218 C. 181; 219 C. 674; 223 C. 376; 226 C. 569; 227 C. 261; 228 C. 401; Id., 535; 231 C. 287; Id., 469; 235 C. 790; 239 C. 676; 241 C. 282. Awards become final if and when parties fail to appeal within applicable statutory time period and are not “pending matters” subject to modification based on subsequent changes in law. 244 C. 1. Defendant was an aggrieved party for purpose of appeal to Appellate Court. 245 C. 437. In order for decision of review board to be appealable under section, it must be a decision that has the same elements of finality as a final judgment rendered by a trial court. 246 C. 281. Meaning of “any party” discussed. 250 C. 147. Appeal dismissed due to lack of a final judgment in matter that required a remand to worker's compensation commissioner to apportion liability. 282 C. 386. Sec. 1-2z does not overrule prior case law importing a final judgment requirement into this section. Id., 477. Under 2009 revision, Appellate Court improperly concluded that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction for lack of a final judgment in matter in which defendant challenged the commissioner's initial finding of plaintiff's total disability, but after remand by the board to the commissioner, did not challenge the commissioner's subsequent findings and award specifying amounts to be paid to plaintiff. 303 C. 238.
Cited. 3 CA 162; Id., 335; Id., 370; 6 CA 45; Id., 498; 13 CA 566; 21 CA 107; 26 CA 194; 28 CA 113; 33 CA 495; Id., 695; 36 CA 298; 37 CA 392; Id., 648; 38 CA 1; 39 CA 653; 41 CA 116; 45 CA 199.
Notes of Decisions
Hummel v. Marten Transports, Ltd., 923 A.2d 657 (Conn. 2007).
· cites it 123× “This certified appeal raises two principal issues: (1) whether, under the plain meaning rule of recently enacted General Statutes § 1-2z, [2] we are obliged to overrule our precedent importing a final judgment requirement into General Statutes § 31-301b, [3] which governs…”
Hall v. Gilbert & Bennett Mfg. Co., 695 A.2d 1051 (Conn. 1997).
· cites it 22× “5 The fund appealed from the decision of the board to the *289 Appellate Court pursuant to General Statutes §31-301b, 6 and we transferred the appeal to this court pursuant to Practice Book § 4023 and General Statutes §51-199 (c).”
State v. Salmon, 735 A.2d 333 (Conn. 1999).
· cites it 10× “In Day, we interpreted the term “party” in the context *156 of General Statutes § 31-301b of the Workers’ Compensation Act.”
Cleveland v. U.S. Printing Ink, Inc., 588 A.2d 194 (Conn. 1991).
· cites it 10× “The defendants claim that because the right of appeal from the review division to the Appellate Court is statutory; General Statutes § 31-301b; 3 and because General Statutes § 31-301b nowhere states that the decision appealed from must be final, a final decision was not…”
Dechio v. Raymark Indus., Inc., 968 A.2d 450 (Conn. App. Ct. 2009).
· cites it 12× “Hummel concerns the application of the final judgment rule to appeals from the board under General Statutes § 31-301b. Hummel v. Marten Transport, Ltd.”
Rayhall v. Akim Co., 819 A.2d 803 (Conn. 2003).
· cites it 4× “In the present case, the plaintiff appeals to this court pursuant to General Statutes § 31-301b, which provides that “[a]ny party aggrieved by the decision of the Compensation Review Board upon any question or questions of law arising in the proceedings may appeal the decision…”
Dowling v. Slotnik, 712 A.2d 396 (Conn. 1998).
· cites it 4× “Acting pro se, Slotnik appealed from the decision of the board to the Appellate Court pursuant to General Statutes § 31-301b. 11 The claimant subsequently filed a motion in the Appellate Court seeking dismissal of Reverand’s appeal for her failure to file properly.”
Hunt v. Borough of Naugatuck, 868 A.2d 54 (Conn. 2005).
· cites it 7× “The defendant appealed from the board’s decision to the Appellate Court pursuant to General Statutes § 31-301b, 7 challenging only that portion of the decision in which the board concluded that the plaintiff had asserted a timely claim.”
Vincent v. City of New Haven, 941 A.2d 932 (Conn. 2008).
· cites it 4× “[6] The city appealed from the decision of the board to the Appellate Court pursuant to General Statutes § 31-301b, and we transferred the appeal to this court pursuant to General Statutes § 51-199(c) and.”
Fullerton v. Adm'r, 911 A.2d 736 (Conn. 2006).
· cites it 6× “In Rayhall , we concluded that General Statutes § 31-301b provided a jurisdictional basis for the trial court to consider a constitutional challenge to the Workers’ Compensation Act, even though the workers’ compensation review board did not have jurisdiction to hear the claim,…”
Bakelaar v. City of West Haven, 475 A.2d 283 (Conn. 1984).
· cites it 3× “I The first assignment of error we shall consider is the city’s claim that the Appellate Session of the Superior Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal because USFG was not an aggrieved party under General Statutes § 31-301b. 4 This section is applicable to appeals…”
Marone v. City of Waterbury, 707 A.2d 725 (Conn. 1998).
· cites it 4× “” General Statutes § 31-301b provides: “Appeal of decision of Compensation Review Board.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.