CASE NO. 103 CRD-3-81Workers’ Compensation Commission
JULY 27, 1984
The Claimant-Appellee was represented by Charles L. Flynn, Esq.
The Respondent-Appellant was represented by Edward Gallant, Esq.
This Petition for Review from the November 10, 1981 Denial of Respondent’s Motion To Reopen And To Correct Finding by the Commissioner for the Third District was argued June 25, 1982 before a Compensation Review Division Panel consisting of the Commission Chairman, John Arcudi, and Commissioners A. Paul Berte and Gerald Kolinsky.
OPINION
JOHN ARCUDI, Chairman.
The respondent municipality appeal in this matter is from a denial of a motion filed July 22, 1980 to reopen a July 10, 1979 award of benefits to the claimant policeman and his surviving spouse. The original July 10, 1979 Finding and Award of the Third District Commissioner was based on a stipulation of facts executed by both parties. More than a year after the decision based on this agreed stipulation between the parties, one of them, the City of West Haven, changed its mind and filed the motion whose denial is the subject of this proceeding.
Our decision in the matter has been delayed, because all parties were awaiting a decision in Bakelaar v. West Haven, 193 Conn. 59 (April 24, 1984). There the Supreme Court decided that a municipal policeman or fireman in heart and hypertension cases has the choice of remedy, whether to proceed under the bonus Sec. 7-433c legislation or directly under Chapter 568. The municipality cannot create a Chapter 568 case if the claimant has chosen to proceed under Sec. 7-433c. That precedent prohibits the respondent here from litigating Chapter 568 compensability issues should this panel choose to reverse the district commissioner’s decision and grant the motion to reopen. Bakelaar renders futile any reopening to litigate those particular issues.
However, the respondent advances another argument for reopening, i.e. that the district commissioner lacked jurisdiction over the matter as the notice requirement of Sec. 31-294 had not been satisfied. Respondents’ allegation is that claimant had not filed written notice of claim within a year. But even if this allegation is factually correct, there are other methods in Sec. 31-294 by which constructive notice may be obtained. That may be the very reason why the respondent agreed in the first instance that the commissioner had jurisdiction one year before a change of counsel caused it to change its mind’.
Besides, especially in Workers’ Compensation matters, there must be a finality to litigation at some point, a “finis litium” Hayden v. Wallace Sons Mfg. Co., 100 Conn. 180 (123).
The decision of the district commissioner denying the “Motion to Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner to Correct Finding by Opening and Modifying Judgment” is affirmed.
Commissioners Berte and Kolinsky concur in this opinion.