Page 33 - CLT072720

CONNECTICUT OPINIONS JULY 27, 2020 ¦ 33

Plaintiff was employed with defendant for 6 within 28 days, and therefore defendant must
years as a plumbing sales specialist, which re- accept the injury but contest its extent. Plaintiff
quired him to lift heavy objects, and in 2013 filed a petition for review with the board, who
plaintiff filed a form 30C in which he sought overturned the commissioner’s decision and
compensation for a repetitive trauma to his reinstated the plaintiff ’s motion to preclude,
lumbar spine. Defendant did not respond for and defendant appealed. The court upheld the
18 months, and in 2015 defendant filed a be- board’s conclusion, and found that defendant
lated form 43 in which it contested liability for had an obligation to either commence payment
plaintiff ’s injuries. Plaintiff filed a motion to or reserve their rights to safe harbor. The court
preclude defendants from contesting compensa- found that failing to do either precluded defen-
bility, and the commissioner and appeals board dant from contesting the extent of the injury,
granted the plaintiff ’s motion. On appeal, the and found in favor of the plaintiff.
defendant argued that the Dubrosky exception
should apply to the present claim because the
plaintiff failed to present medical or indemnity SUPERIOR COURT

benefits within the 28-day statutory period fol-
lowing the filing of form 30C. The court found
the defendant did not accept liability for plain- CIVIL PROCEDURE • PERSONAL INJURY

tiff ’s injuries, but rather denied liability in their

belated form. As such, the court found this case Motion to Implead Denied
distinct from Dubrosky and upheld the board’s
decision to preclude defendants from contesting CASE: Murphy v. Town of Ridgefield
compensability. COURT: Danbury J.D. at Danbury
DOC. NO.: CV19-6034150
COURT OPINION BY: D’Andrea
PERSONAL INJURY • ADMINISTRATIVE LAW DATE: July 01, 2020 • PAGES: 12
The court denied defendant Town of Ridge-
Court Upholds Workers’ Compensation field’s motion to implead defendant Wells Fargo
Review Board’s Decision To Preclude Bank, N.A., as a third party defendant, find-
Employer From Disputing Extent Of ing that Ridgefield, if found liable for plain-
Injury tiff ’s injuries, may later pursue indemnification
against Wells Fargo N.A., through a separate
action. Plaintiff tripped and fell, allegedly due
CASE: Dominguez v. New York Sports Club to a defective sidewalk. She sued the Town of
COURT: Connecticut Appellate Court Ridgefield, as well as Fairfield Properties, Inc.
DOC. NO.: AC 42089 and Wells Fargo Company, alleging that Fair-
COURT OPINION BY: Elgo field and Wells Fargo Co. owned the property
DATE: July 14, 2020 • PAGES: 18 abutting the defective sidewalk and were in pos-
Plaintiff was injured while employed with the session, custody, and control of the sidewalk.
defendant, exacerbating an already-existing Ridgefield moved to implead Wells Fargo Bank,
injury while moving gym items. Plaintiff filed N.A., seeking indemnification against it and al-
notice for a claim for compensation with the leging that it also owned the property abutting
Workers’ Compensation Commission, and over the sidewalk and had obligations to the town
the next seven weeks defendant did not file any pursuant to local ordinances. Fairfield and Wells
response to the notice. After that, plaintiff filed Fargo Co. objected. The court denied the mo-
a motion to preclude the defendant from con- tion to implead and sustained defendants’ ob-
testing plaintiff ’s right to receive compensa- jections, finding that granting the motion would
tion. Defendant then filed a belated form 43. work an injustice upon plaintiff, who was now
In the Reasons to Contest portion of the form, barred by the applicable statute of limitations
defendant alleged the injury did not rise out from making any claim against Wells Fargo
of or in the course of employment, and that Bank, N.A.. Should plaintiff succeed in her ac-
no medical records were provided to support tion against Ridgefield, it would be entitled to
compensability. At a formal hearing before the file a separate and independent complaint seek-
Workers’ Compensation Commissioner, the ing indemnification from Wells Fargo, N.A., and
Commissioner found plaintiff had present- was accordingly not prejudiced by the denial of
ed no medical bills, nor requested payments its motion to implead.

CONNECTICUT
Law Tribune