LEPINO v. ELECTROLUX CORPORATION, 561 CRD-7-87 (4-26-88)

VIVIAN LEPINO, Dependent widow of JOSEPH J. LEPINO (Deceased), CLAIMANT-APPELLEE vs. ELECTROLUX CORPORATION, EMPLOYER and RELIANCE INSURANCE GROUP, INSURER, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT and THE TRAVELERS, INSURER and AETNA CASUALTY SURETY CO., INSURER

CASE NO. 561 CRD-7-87Workers’ Compensation Commission
APRIL 26, 1988

Claimant was represented by Gerard S. Spiegel, Esq.

Respondent-employer and insurer, Reliance Insurance Group, were represented by Kevin J. Maher, Esq.

Respondent insurer, Travelers, was represented by William C. Brown., McGann, Bartlett Brown. Respondent Travelers withdrew from the appeal.

Respondent insurer, Aetna, did not appear.

This Petition for Review from the February 6, 1987 Ruling on a Motion to Preclude of the Commissioner for the Seventh District was heard December 4, 1987 before a Compensation Review Division panel consisting of the Commission Chairman, John Arcudi, and Commissioners Andrew Denuzze and A. Thomas White, Jr.

OPINION

JOHN ARCUDI, Chairman.

Claimant’s decedent, Joseph Lepino, died December 25, 1984. Claimant alleges that death was caused by her decedent’s exposure to paint while employed as a paint sprayer during the period of December 2, 1945 through September 30, 1963.

Respondent-Insurer, Reliance Insurance Group, appealed the Seventh District February 6, 1987 ruling granting the claimant’s Motion to Preclude Defenses. As part of the appeal, a Motion for Extension of Time to File Reasons of Appeal was filed February 13, 1987 with the Compensation Review Division. Respondent’s Motion requested an extension until four (4) weeks after the trial commissioner’s ruling on its Motion to Correct, but the Chairman only granted an extension until two weeks after the ruling by the trial commissioner on its Motion to Correct. The ruling on the Motion to Correct occurred September 28, 1987. Two weeks after that date was October 16, 1987. Respondent filed its Reasons of Appeal October 26, 1987.

Claimant filed a Motion to Dismiss on October 22, 1987 within ten (10) days after the October 16 failure to file Reasons of Appeal within the two (2) weeks granted by the Chairman. We must therefore grant claimant’s Motion to Dismiss. Sager v. GAB Business Services, 11 Conn. App. 693 (1987), Emmens v. Southbury Food Center, 3 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 73, 455 CRD-5-86 (1986).

Commissioners Andrew Denuzze and A. Thomas White, Jr. concur