This board affirmed that finding, which was largely a factual matter involving the interpretation of the attorney's remarks at trial, in Pantanella II . The claimant then moved for further attorney's fees in light of the undue delay caused by CIGA's belated assertion of the statute of limitations defense. This sequence of events occurred prior to the release of this board's decision in Pantanella II . We disagree with these assertions of error. First, a trier is no more precluded from awarding attorney's fees before the merits of a case have been appealed to the Appellate Court than he is from awarding attorney's fees before the merits of a case have been appealed to this board.
Awards frequently direct the payment of both compensation and attorney's fees.
Practice Book 61-11, which CIGA cites in support of its contention, proscribes proceedings to carry out or enforce a civil judgment pending the resolution of an appeal. Thus, P.B. 61-11 has no practical application here. At that time, the issue of 38-841 notice had not yet been raised by CIGA as a defense against the claimant. We affirmed that award in Pantanella II . Now, a second fee award has been made.