From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bull v. Raymark Industries, Inc.

Workers' Compensation Commission
Jun 8, 1987
474 CRD 4 (Conn. Work Comp. 1987)

Opinion

CASE NO. 474 CRD-4-86

JUNE 8, 1987

The claimant was represented by Lindalea P. Ludwick, Esq., Sklarz Early, P.C.

The respondent was represented by Lewis Lerman, Esq., Bai, Pollock and Dunnigan.

No oral argument occurred as the parties agreed the matter was governed by a recent C.R.D. decision.

This Petition for Review from the April 8, 1986 decision granting of the Motion to Preclude by the Commissioner for the Fourth District was decided May 29, 1987 by a Compensation Review Division panel consisting of the Commission Chairman, John Arcudi, and Commissioners Robin Waller and Andrew Denuzze.


OPINION


Respondent appealed the Fourth District Commissioner's April 8, 1986 decision granting the claimant's Motion to Preclude. The facts in the instant matter are analogous to those in Squier v Raymark Industries Inc., 406 CRD-4-85 (April 3, 1987). Therefore, that decision governs.

We affirm the trial Commissioner and dismiss Respondent's appeal.

Commissioners Robin Waller and Andrew Denuzze concur.


Summaries of

Bull v. Raymark Industries, Inc.

Workers' Compensation Commission
Jun 8, 1987
474 CRD 4 (Conn. Work Comp. 1987)
Case details for

Bull v. Raymark Industries, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JANE BULL Dependent Widow of MILAN BULL (Deceased), CLAIMANT-APPELLEE vs…

Court:Workers' Compensation Commission

Date published: Jun 8, 1987

Citations

474 CRD 4 (Conn. Work Comp. 1987)