CASE NO. 25-CRD-7-80Workers’ Compensation Commission
FEBRUARY 25, 1982
A. Paul Berte’, Commissioner, Robin Waller, Commissioner, Rhoda Loeb, Commissioner
SUPPLEMENTAL FINDING AND AWARD
1. On November 17, 1981, the Commissioner below filed CORRECTION OF FINDING in response to the Compensation Review Division’s remand order contained in our Finding and Award issued October 14, 1981.
2. The Commissioner’s finding as corrected does not contain all the subordinate facts which are pertinent to the inquiry and the conclusions of the Commissioner therefrom and, therefore, this matter is remanded to the Commissioner for further findings.
3. Paragraphs 15a, 17a, and 18a are remanded to the Commissioner below for further findings of fact. The issues presented in paragraph 15a concerning the giving of written notice must be considered to determine whether or not the Commissioner found:
a. That the Claimant gave a writing to the employer, and, if she did,
b. Whether such writing meets the requirements set forth in C.G.S. Sec. 31-294.
ORDER
1. Accordingly, this appeal is further remanded for an amended finding and award consistent with this supplemental finding and award.
OPINION
Board of Compensation Commissioners’ Administrative Regulations Section 31-301-3 provides that the finding of the Commissioner should contain only the ultimate, relevant and material facts essential to the case at hand and found by him. The ultimate relevant and material facts requisite to a proper finding in this instance included those focusing on whether the Claimant gave written notice of claim for compensation as required by Sec. 31-294. After particular note of Board of Compensation Commissioners’ Administrative Regulations Section 31-301-8 which details the function of the Compensation Review Division on appeal, see Balkus v. Terry Steam Turbine Co., 167 Conn. 170, 173, 174 (1974), we are of the opinion that this finding as corrected does not contain all the subordinate facts which are pertinent to the appeal, and the conclusions of the Commissioner therefrom, and therefore this Division is not in a position to decide whether the Commissioner’s decision was correct and just or not. McQuade v. Ashford, 130 Conn. 478, 482
(1944).
Since the finding as corrected is deficient, the Division deems it advisable and does so remand this appeal for an amended finding and award consistent herewith.