 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Grenz v. Fire & Casualty of Connecticut8/17/1993
nt of the availability of a compensation claim; he had participated in the process before. Regarding his asserted illiteracy, we note that Grenz initially obtained workers' compensation benefits for his elbow injury beginning in 1984 and has become quite familiar with the procedures involved. We also note the reams of judicial papers which Grenz has filed as a very competent pro se litigant in the process of this protracted litigation. F&C had no duty to inform Grenz of his duty to assert a separate claim.
We conclude that, under any form of equitable estoppel, the statute of limitations is not tolled in this case.
BREACH OF TRUST
Lastly, Grenz asserts that F&C stood in a trust relationship with Grenz and that F&C breached that trust in handling his workers' compensation claim. In Grenz II, this Court specifically limited the issues on remand:
Reversed and remanded with instructions to the Workers' Compensation Court to proceed to a determination of the insurer's alternative basis for its motion to dismiss, namely, that Grenz's latest claims are time barred.
Grenz II, 841 P.2d at 496. Given that explicit mandate, Grenz was precluded from raising the new issue of breach of trust on remand and, therefore, the issue is not properly before this Court.
We conclude that the Workers' Compensation Court did not err in dismissing Grenz' petition for Workers' Compensation benefits based on his failure to comply with the statute of limitations.
Affirmed.
CHIEF JUSTICE TURNAGE, JUSTICES WEBER, NELSON and HUNT concur.
|