Source: https://wcc.state.ct.us/crb/1999/3617crb2.htm
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 02:33:39+00:00

Document:
The claimant has filed an appeal from the April 8, 1997 Finding and Award of the Commissioner acting for the Fifth District. The claimant’s appeal was dismissed as a late appeal by a decision issued on October 9, 1997, Gyadu v. D’Addario Industries, 3617 CRB-5-97-4 (October 9, 1997). Pursuant to an appeal by the claimant, the Appellate Court issued Gyadu v. D’Addario Industries, Inc., 53 Conn. App. 179 (May 11, 1999). In that decision, the court remanded the case to the Board because the Board had not made a factual determination as to the date that the trial commissioner’s decision had been mailed to the parties.
The record indicates that the April 8, 1997 Finding and Award of the Commissioner acting for the Fifth District was properly mailed to all parties on that date. Specifically, a signed certification in the file indicates that on April 8, 1997 a copy of the Finding and Award “was mailed certified return receipt requested to all parties of record.” Moreover, a copy of the return receipt in the file indicates that the delivery date to the claimant was April 10, 1997. The claimant’s appeal was filed on April 24, 1997.
The claimant’s petition for review was not filed within the time limit prescribed by § 31-301(a) C.G.S., which states that “[a]t any time within ten days after entry of an award by the commissioner . . . either party may appeal therefrom to the compensation review board by filing in the office of the commissioner . . . an appeal petition . . . .” (Emphasis added). We have consistently ruled that the appealing party must file its appeal within the prescribed time period in order for this Board to have subject matter jurisdiction over the appeal. Corona v. Uniroyal Chemical, Inc., 9 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 105, 987 CRD-5-90-3 (March 13, 1991) (dismissing appeal to this Board filed on the eleventh day following trial commissioner’s decision); Famiglietti v. Dossert Corporation, 8 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 65, 804 CRD-5-88-12 (April 17, 1990); Johnston v. ARA Services Inc., 7 Conn. Workers’ Comp. Rev. Op. 19, 20, 765 CRD-7-88-8 (June 29, 1989).
The claimant’s petition for review was not filed within the time limits required by § 31-301(a) and it is thus dismissed as untimely.

References: v. 
 v. 
 § 31
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 31