CASE NO. 389 CRD-7-85Workers’ Compensation Commission
JUNE 15, 1987
The claimant was represented by Elizabeth Cronin, Esq., Rappaport Benedict, P.C.
The respondents were represented by Ralph Russo, Esq., Montstream May.
This Petition for Review from the March 5, 1985 Finding and Dismissal of the Commissioner for the Seventh District was heard September 20, 1985 before a Compensation Review Division panel consisting of the Commission Chairman, John Arcudi, and Commissioners A. Paul Berte and Andrew Denuzze.
OPINION
JOHN ARCUDI, Chairman.
Claimant, a roofer, sustained a back injury July 16, 1984. The Seventh District Commissioner his March 5, 1985 Finding and Dismissal concluded that the claimant and respondent were not in an employer-employee relationship on July 16, 1984 and therefore dismissed the claim. The issue presented on this appeal is whether the trial Commissioner in conclusion.
Claimant was a roofer doing business under the trade name of Twin Ridge Roofing. He was paid by the square for job; checks payable to the claimant were made out to Twin the claimant paid helpers by Twin Ridge Roofing checks, had a general liability policy for Twin Ridge Roofing and filed a federal income tax return showing he was engaged business under the name Twin Ridge Roofing.
Absent a Motion to Correct, the factual findings of the Commissioner cannot be challenged. Therefore, we need only determine if the trial Commissioner erred as a matter of law in finding claimant was an independent contractor, Adzima v. UAC/Norden Division, 177 Conn. 107 (1979).
Various factors may be determinative of whether a claimant was an employee or independent contractor, Francis v. Franklin Cafeteria Inc., 123 Conn. 320, 326 (1937). However, as noted in Gadacy v. William Busk, 431 CRD-4-85 February 1987), “whether a party is an independent contractor or an employee turns on the degree of control exercised by the alleged employer, Kaliszewski v. Weathermaster Alsco Corp., 148 Conn. 624, 627 (1961)”.
Kaliszewski is distinguishable from the instant case. Here claimant had filed a federal income tax return that he was engaged in business under the name Twin Ridge Roofing. That would support a conclusion that Chillington was fact an independent contractor.
We, therefore, affirm the Finding and Dismissal of the Commissioner of the Seventh District.
Commissioners A. Paul Berte and Andrew Denuzze concur.