Source: https://connecticut.lexroll.com/anderson-v-colt-manufacturing-co-inc-1930-crb-1-93-12-8-15-95/
Timestamp: 2019-02-18 22:07:39
Document Index: 43229896

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 31', '§31', '§31', '§ 31', '§ 31', '§31', '§ 31']

ANDERSON v. COLT MANUFACTURING. CO., INC., 1930 CRB-1-93-12 (8-15-95) | LexRoll (CT)
ANDERSON v. COLT MANUFACTURING. CO., INC., 1930 CRB-1-93-12 (8-15-95)
LexRoll.com > LexRoll (CT) > Connecticut Workers Compensation Commission Opinions > ANDERSON v. COLT MANUFACTURING. CO., INC., 1930 CRB-1-93-12 (8-15-95)
INEZ ANDERSON et al, CLAIMANTS-APPELLEES v. COLT MANUFACTURING. CO., INC., EMPLOYER, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE and COLTEC INDUSTRIES, INC., EMPLOYER, SELF-INSURED, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT and SECOND INJURY FUND, RESPONDENT-APPELLEE
CASE NO. 1930 CRB-1-93-12Workers’ Compensation Commission
The claimants were not represented at oral argument. At the formal hearing, the interest of all 22 named claimants was represented by Stephen Edgerly of the United Auto Workers, International Union.
The respondent-appellant Coltec Industries was represented by Burton Kainen, Esq., Diana Garfield, Esq. and Sheldon D. Myers, Esq., Kainen, Starr, Garfield, Wright Escalera, P.C.
The respondent-appellee Colt Manufacturing Co., Inc. was represented by David C. Anderson, Esq., Murtha, Cullina, Richter Pinney, P.C.
The Second Injury Fund was represented by Michael J. Belzer, Esq., Assistant Attorney General.
The respondent Coltec Industries, Inc. (Coltec) has petitioned for review from the December 13, 1993 Finding and Dismissal of the Commissioner for the First District. It argues on appeal that the commissioner erred by failing to order the transfer of liability for certain workers’ compensation claims to the Second Injury Fund. We affirm the trial commissioner’s decision.
The parties involved in this appeal stipulated that Coltec, also known as Colt Industries, Inc., is a Pennsylvania corporation headquartered in New York City. This corporation owned and operated several businesses in Connecticut, including Colt Firearms and Chandler Evans. All of the claimants in this case were employees of the Firearms Division who suffered or claim to have suffered compensable injuries on or before March 22, 1990. On or about that date, Coltec agreed to sell, and C.F. Holdings, Inc., agreed to purchase, certain assets and liabilities of the Firearms Division, which subsequently became known as Colt’s Manufacturing Co. (Colt’s).
As part of the sale agreement, Colt’s agreed to assume the runoff responsibilities for administering the workers’ compensation claims that had been previously handled by the Firearms Division of Coltec. Travelers Insurance Corp. became Colt’s new insurer. “Colt Industries, Inc. Firearms Division and Chandler Evans” had been self-insured for workers’ compensation purposes for many years, and continued to be self-insured through January 1, 1991. This coverage terminated with respect to the Firearms Division on the date of its purchase by C.F. Holdings, Inc. “Coltec Industries, Inc./Chandler Evans Division” subsequently received certificates of solvency for 1991 and 1992.
On March 18, 1992, Colt’s filed a Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition, and thereafter ceased making workers’ compensation payments.[1] Coltec agreed to administer the claims for injuries sustained prior to March 22, 1990, until a final determination as to liability could be made. At the formal hearing, Coltec argued that liability for the claims in question was validly transferred to Colt’s, and that said liability should now be transferred to the Second Injury Fund in light of Colt’s bankruptcy. It further argued that the involvement of the State Treasurer in the purchase of Colt’s estopped the Fund from arguing that Coltec is still liable for those claims.
We first consider whether the Workers’ Compensation Act allows a self-insured employer to permanently relieve itself of liability for existing workers’ compensation claims. Section 31-284(b) C.G.S. provides that “[e]ach employer who does not furnish to the chairman of the workers’ compensation commission satisfactory proof of his solvency and financial ability to pay directly to injured employees or other beneficiaries compensation provided by this chapter shall insure his full liability under this chapter . . . .” Implicitly underlying this provision is the notion that some employers might not be required to purchase workers’ compensation insurance, which is borne out by other sections of the Act. See, e.g., § 31-284(c)-(d) C.G.S.; §31-345 C.G.S. We stress, however, that the statute does no entitle an employer to forego such insurance even if proof of solvency and ability to pay compensation exists; rather, §31-284 (b) directly speaks only to when insurance is required.
In practice, this Commission has granted certificates of solvency to employers who have been able to their prove solvency under § 31-284(b) and their financial ability to pay compensation and required assessments under § 31-284(b)-(c). Security in the form of a surety bond and excess insurance coverage are required by this Commission before an application to self-insure may be granted, and updated applications are required annually. Violations of the statutes or regulations surrounding self-insurance and the administration of claims under the Act result in revocation of one’s certificate of solvency. Also, a self-insurance certificate terminates upon the sale or merger of a company, and financial information regarding the new owner or parent company is required before another certificate of solvency can be issued. These practices demonstrate that this Commission does not take the self-insurance privilege lightly, as it is of utmost importance under the Act that an employee’s right to compensation for his or her injuries be protected by ensuring the financial responsibility of his insurer.
Because we hold that the contract between Coltec and Colt did not excuse Coltec’s liability for the workers’ compensation claims in question, the argument that the Second Injury Fund should be estopped from denying liability based on the involvement of the former Treasurer in the purchase of the Firearms Division becomes moot. Even if the Treasurer did agree on behalf of the Second Injury Fund that Coltec would no longer be responsible in any way for the workers’ compensation claims (and we do not think he did), he clearly did not have the authority to act on behalf of the Workers’ Compensation Commission. As we stated above, only the actions of this Commission could conceivably excuse a solvent self-insured from liability for prior claims. No such permission was given in this case. As the Second Injury Fund is ultimately liable under §31-355 C.G.S. only when an employer and insurer are both unable to pay, Fund liability not yet implicated in this case because Coltec, the self-insurer, is not insolvent. Thus, we need not delve deeper into the issues of estoppel and reliance.
[1] The appellant moved to submit as additional evidence pursuant to Admin. Reg. § 31-301-9 the September 16, 1994 Order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut confirming Colt’s Chapter 11 Reorganization Plan. We grant this motion, because the order was obviously not available at the formal hearing, and it is material to our decision in this appeal. We also note that the appellant’s motion to exclude an exhibit attached to the Second Injury Fund’s brief was granted at oral argument, as the Fund did not follow proper procedure in attempting to admit additional evidence.