Ross v. City of New Haven
| Citation | 561 A.2d 457,19 Conn.App. 169 |
| Decision Date | 18 July 1989 |
| Docket Number | No. 7432,7432 |
| Court | Appellate Court of Connecticut |
| Parties | John ROSS v. CITY OF NEW HAVEN et al. |
Richard A. Roberts, Cheshire, for plaintiff.
W. Martyn Philpot, Jr., Asst. Corp. Counsel, Hartford, for named defendant.
Before DALY, EDWARD Y. O'CONNELL and FOTI, JJ.
This case comes before us, pursuant to Practice Book § 4147, by reservation of two questions of law from the trial court. The questions are: (1) "Is the city of New Haven obligated under the Connecticut General Statutes [§ 38-327] and Regulations to provide uninsured motorist benefits to operators of patrol cars it owns which are used by the city of New Haven's department of police services, with respect to which it is self-insured?" and (2) "Does the city of New Haven's status as employer of the plaintiff, John Ross, and the fact that the city of New Haven has paid workers' compensation benefits to him, or on his behalf, bar the plaintiff, pursuant to [General Statutes] § 31-284, from receiving uninsured motorist benefits?" We decline to answer question one, and we answer question two in the affirmative.
A stipulation filed pursuant to Practice Book § 4148 shows that the plaintiff, a New Haven police officer, was on duty driving a New Haven police department patrol car when he was injured in an accident with an uninsured motorist. He received workers' compensation benefits from the city of New Haven and in this action seeks to recover uninsured motorist benefits from the city.
For the sake of clarity, we will discuss the questions in the reverse order in which they are presented. Thus, we first consider whether the plaintiff's receipt of workers' compensation benefits from the city bars him from receiving uninsured motorist benefits from the city. The pertinent part of our workers' compensation law provides: "All rights and claims between employer and employees ... arising out of personal injury ... sustained in the course of employment ... are abolished other than rights and claims given by this chapter...." General Statutes § 31-284. This statute has been repeatedly and uniformly construed by the courts of this state to exclude further recovery from the employer by an employee who has received workers' compensation benefits. Sharp v. Mitchell, 209 Conn. 59, 64, 546 A.2d 846 (1988); Panaro v. Electrolux Corporation, 208 Conn. 589, 599, 545 A.2d 1086 (1988); Sullivan v. State, 189 Conn. 550, 558, 457 A.2d 304 (1983). Accordingly, we conclude that the answer to the second question is yes; the plaintiff is barred from receiving...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bouley v. City of Norwich
...city. The trial court granted the city's motion for summary judgment in reliance on the Appellate Court's decision in Ross v. New Haven, 19 Conn.App. 169, 561 A.2d 457, cert. granted, 212 Conn. 814, 565 A.2d 536 (1989), 7 which had held that a police officer injured in the course of employm......
-
Suarez v. Dickmont Plastics Corp., 14765
...BT II Ltd. Partnership, 24 Conn.App. 739, 744, 592 A.2d 397, cert. dismissed, 220 Conn. 902, 593 A.2d 968 (1991); Ross v. New Haven, 19 Conn.App. 169, 171, 561 A.2d 457 (1989); Hatcher v. Bullard Co., 39 Conn.Supp. 250, 257, 477 A.2d 1035 (1984), aff'd, 4 Conn.App. 260, 493 A.2d 908 These c......
-
Bouley v. City of Norwich, 9046
...plaintiff is not entitled to compensation beyond his workers' compensation benefits. 4 We addressed the same issue in Ross v. New Haven, 19 Conn.App. 169, 561 A.2d 457, cert. granted, 212 Conn. 814, 565 A.2d 536 (1989). 5 In Ross, we held that the exclusive remedy provision of General Statu......
-
Cattaneo v. Cattaneo
... ... William H. Cashman, New Haven, for appellee (plaintiff) ... Before [19 Conn.App. 161] DUPONT, C.J., and EDWARD ... ...