News Main Page

Email A Friend

More News

May 14, 2024
California Division of Workers' Compensation Announces Plans to Take Corrective Action Regarding E-Filer Errors

May 11, 2024
ICW Group increases workers’ compensation insurance coverage into New York

May 7, 2024
California Division of Workers' Compensation Posts Additional Adjustments to Official Medical Fee Schedule (Hospital Outpatient Departments / Ambulatory Surgical Centers)

April 25, 2024
California Department of Industrial Relations and Cal/OSHA Will Honor Workers’ Memorial Day at Four Events in California on April 28th-29th 2024. Cal/OSHA Joining Partners in Arcadia, Richmond, San Diego and San Francisco.

The Connecticut Supreme Court determined that rejection of a workers’ compensation claim must be delivered and not simply mailed within 28 days.  The high court defined the word “file” in a workers’ compensation case and it was the clarified language that determined rejection letters must be delivered.

After a claimant, a plaintiff named Ajredin Ajdini, sustained two injuries in July of 2018, he sent Frank Lill & Son, his employer, plus the Workers’ Compensation Commission, a Form 30C notice of claim for each injury.  According to court records they were delivered on May 3rd 2019.  

Frank Lill & Son, the employer, mailed a Form 43 notice of intent to contest the claim for benefits on May 29th 2019.  The Workers’ Compensation Commission received it on June 3rd 2019.

The claimant-plaintiff, Ajredin Ajdini, received his copy on June 6th 2019.  Form 43 must be filed within 28 days to contest any claim.  

The claimant-plaintiff, Ajredin Ajdini, argued in a motion to preclude that since the employer failed to start payment of the claims or file a notice of intention to contest the claims within 28 days following its receipt of the notice of claims (as required by §31-294c(b)), “the employer should be presumed to have accepted the compensability of the plaintiff’s alleged injuries and precluded from contesting the claims.”

The administrative law judge granted the motion.  The employer and its workers’ compensation claims payers (defendants) claimed the “date of service is deemed to be the date of mailing,” but the Compensation Review Board did not agree.

On appeal, the defendants said the mailbox rule applies and it was the Legislature’s intent for it to be used in the context of workers’ compensation statutes.

The plaintiff argued that the mailbox rule does not apply under the definition of filing, which the plaintiff claimed required a receipt, “and to conclude otherwise would… create delays and leave claimants in limbo.”  

The Connecticut Supreme Court found that the word “file” was not defined in the statute, and therefore used the dictionary.  The amendments relevant to this lawsuit in the Workers’ Compensation Act were passed in 1993.  The definition of “file” in Black’s Law Dictionary was: to deliver (as a legal paper or instrument) to the proper officer for keeping on file or among the records of his office.”

Thus, the high court said: “it is plain and unambiguous that a notice of intention to contest compensation must be delivered, not just mailed, to the administrative law judge on or before the 28th day after the employer received written notice of claim.”  

Plaintiff Ajredin Ajdini’s counsel, Andrew Wallace, said he is pleased the Connecticut Supreme Court confirmed that the mailbox rule does not apply to Form 43 when granting a motion to preclude.
 
Wallace said this is an important decision for injured workers.  When a worker is injured, he-she often needs medical treatment and temporary disability payments right away. “Most injured workers do not have the luxury of waiting more than the 28-day statutory response period,” he went on, “and this ruling will ultimately help hold employers and insurers responsible for timely investigating and responding to the notice of claim with that allotted 28-day period.”  

adjustercom, www.adjustercom.com, hermes@adjustercom.com