CASE NO. 577 CRD-5-87Workers’ Compensation Commission
JANUARY 9, 1988
The claimant was represented by Kevin Bowen, Esq., Brignole and Bowen.
The respondent St. Paul Insurance Co. was represented by George Duborg, Esq. and David Bull, Esq., Chabot Breen.
The respondent Employers Mutual Insurance Co. was represented by David Kelly, Esq., Robert Reeve, Esq. and Robert Montstream, Esq., Montstream
May.
The respondent Hartford Insurance Co. was represented by Richard Stabnick, Esq. and Anne Kelly, Esq., Pomeranz, Drayton Stabnick.
This Petition for Review from the March 9, 1987 Finding and Award of the Commissioner for the Fifth District was heard May 20, 1988 before a Compensation Review Division panel consisting of the Commission Chairman, John Arcudi, and Commissioners Gerald Kolinsky and Andrew Denuzze.
OPINION
JOHN ARCUDI, Chairman.
The Fifth District Commissioner on March 9, 1987 found claimant’s back injury compensable. In his Finding and Award the trial Commissioner narrated four specific work-related events, August, 1979, September, 1982, July 15, 1983 and March 23, 1984 as related to that back injury. He then found that the injury and subsequent disc surgery resulted “from the work related repetitive trauma from January, 1976 to March 23, 1984”.
On appeal, the insurer respondents argue that there are not sufficient facts found to determine if one or all the insurers are obligated to pay the award. Different insurers were on the risk at the time of each of the specific incidents listed in the Finding. If those happenings definitely located in time and place as defined in Sec. 31-275(8), C.G.S. are the compensable events, then the carriers on the risk on those dates must pay once the proportion of their responsibility is identified. If the process of injury was continuous or repetitive trauma as defined in Sec. 31-275(8) over the whole time span, then the fractional responsibility of each will be proportional to the amount of time on the risk.
Further, if the specific instance concept is invoked, then there may be a jurisdictional problem in the earlier instances involving the statute of non-claim, Sec. 31-294, C.G.S.. The Compensation Review Division as an appellate tribunal cannot make those evidential determinations. Therefore, the appeal is sustained. The matter is remanded to the Fifth District, either for a rehearing of the entire matter or for further proceedings before the original trier to complete the Finding and to articulate the precise theory of liability.
Commissioners Gerald Kolinsky and Andrew Denuzze concur.