Compensation payable under this chapter shall be paid at the particular times in the week and in the manner the administrative law judge may order, and shall be paid directly to the persons entitled to receive them unless the administrative law judge, for good reason, orders payment to those entitled to act for such persons, except that when the administrative law judge finds it just or necessary, the administrative law judge may approve or direct the commutation, in whole or in part, of weekly compensation under the provisions of this chapter into monthly or quarterly payments, or into a single lump sum, which may be paid to the one then entitled to the compensation, and the commutation shall be binding upon all persons entitled to compensation for the injury in question. In any case of commutation, a true equivalence of value shall be maintained, with due discount of sums payable in the future; and, when commutation is made into a single lump sum, (1) the administrative law judge may direct that it be paid to any savings bank, trust company or life insurance company authorized to do business within this state, to be held in trust for the beneficiary or beneficiaries under the provisions of this chapter and paid in conformity with the provisions of this chapter, and (2) the parties, by agreement and with approval of the administrative law judge, may prorate the single lump sum over the life expectancy of the injured employee.
(1949 Rev., S. 7451; 1958 Rev., S. 31-178; 1961, P.A. 491, S. 24; P.A. 91-32, S. 20, 41; P.A. 04-214, S. 1; P.A. 21-18, S. 1.)
History: 1961 act entirely replaced previous provisions; P.A. 91-32 made technical changes; P.A. 04-214 made a technical change, designated existing provisions re lump sum payments as Subdiv. (1), and added Subdiv. (2) to allow prorating of lump sum payments over life expectancy of injured employee, effective June 3, 2004; pursuant to P.A. 21-18, “commissioner” was changed editorially by the Revisors to “administrative law judge”, effective October 1, 2021.
Commutation can be made only when compensation period is definite. 96 C. 674; 98 C. 236; 108 C. 644. When commutation may be made in cases of total or partial incapacity. 120 C. 541. Award commuted into lump sum becomes final judgment. 126 C. 491. Award did not establish existence of a compensable claim. 137 C. 185. Cited. 208 C. 576; 226 C. 569.
Cited. 26 CA 194.
Record of agreement for lump-sum payment improperly excluded in action for damages for injury to person since it would have contradicted plaintiff's statement that at time of injury sued on he was suffering from no other disability. 3 Conn. Cir. Ct. 371.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
10
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1965–2021 · leading case:
Diaz v. Bridgeport, 266 A.3d 909 (Conn. App. Ct. 2021).
Diaz v. Bridgeport, 266 A.3d 909 (Conn. App. Ct. 2021).
· cites it 29× “The plaintiff indicated that he was seeking a lump-sum payment to pay past due property taxes, to reduce his credit card debt, and to pay a portion of his children’s student loans.”
Morgan v. Town of East Haven, 546 A.2d 243 (Conn. 1988).
· cites it 4× “See General Statutes § 31-302. 15 The remainder of the award, however, *588 still was payable weekly and remained unmatured.”
Hyatt v. City of Milford, 600 A.2d 5 (Conn. App. Ct. 1991).
· cites it 4× “The plaintiff here, unlike that in McIntyre , received neither a commuted and currently payable nor a lump sum award pursuant to General Statutes § 31-302, 5 but rather received an award of $326 for 195 weeks.”
Schiano v. Bliss Exterminating Co., 792 A.2d 835 (Conn. 2002).
· cites it 2× “See General Statutes § 31-302. *26 During 1989, the plaintiff worked periodically at other jobs, but was unable to continue after September of that year because of severe pain, and thereafter was bedridden for nine weeks.”
Vincent v. City of New Haven, 941 A.2d 932 (Conn. 2008).
· cites it 2× “to 1993) § 31-302, "permanent partial disability awards may be commuted into lump sums and placed in trust for the benefit of the employee and his or her dependents.”
Schroeder v. Triangulum Assocs., 789 A.2d 459 (Conn. 2002).
· cites it 2× “The workers’ compensation commissioner did not commute the present value of the future payments to a lump sum, as required by General Statutes § 31-302. The agreement makes no mention of such a commutation, and the sum paid was clearly the result of a compromise rather than a…”
Cappellino v. Town of Cheshire, 628 A.2d 595 (Conn. 1993).
· cites it 2× “91-32, moved the definition of presumptive dependent from General Statutes § 31-306 to § 31-275 (19).”
Gyadu v. Workers' Comp. Comm'n, 930 F. Supp. 738 (D. Conn. 1996).
· cites it 3× “He complains about the Commissioner’s use of an allegedly incorrect discount rate in calculating the lump sum payment (see C.G.S.A. § 31-302) of a portion of his benefits.”
Crook v. Academy Drywall Co., 591 A.2d 429 (Conn. 1991).
“No dependency allowance shall be payable with respect to any week unless a compensation benefit is also payable with respect to such week, but any such dependency allowance which would be payable on a weekly basis may be included in a monthly, quarterly or lump sum award by the…”
Lombardo v. Simko, 214 A.2d 911 (Conn. App. Ct. 1965).
· cites it 2× “On that date a lump-sum agreement was entered into (General Statutes § 31-302) and executed by the plaintiff, his wife, the employer, and its insurer.”
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.