United States: Connecticut Workers' Compensation Carriers May Pursue Justice

Last Updated: November 1 2016
Article by Jonathan Sterling and Robert D. Helfand

"He who does not punish evil commands that it be done."
— Leonardo da Vinci

Workers' compensation statutes impose liability without fault on the employers of men and women who are injured on the job. They also permit employers to recoup the costs they incur from any third parties who actually caused the injuries through negligence or wrongful acts. But the liability of most employers is covered by insurance, and insured employers often have no incentive to prosecute claims against tortfeasors. So are wrongdoers off the hook?

In Pacific Ins. Co., Ltd. v. Champion Steel, LLC, No. 19402 (Conn. September 27, 2016), one alleged malefactor argued that Connecticut's workers' compensation law, which makes no provision for claims against third parties by insurers, affirmatively bars insurers from seeking remedies against responsible parties. Last month, the Connecticut Supreme Court rejected that claim. In a case of first impression, the court recognized a common law right to pursue equitable subrogation in workers' compensation cases, based on the venerable history of subrogation by insurers, as well as the public policy of the Constitution State. In a stirring endorsement of insurance litigation, the court even declared that insurers' subrogation claims "promote and accomplish justice."

After The Fall

On May 17, 2011, James Doughty, an employee of Connecticut Reliable Welding, LLC, was working at a construction site when his retractable lifeline failed. He fell to the ground and was injured. Because he was hurt in the course of his employment, Mr. Doughty was paid benefits by Reliable's workers' compensation insurer.

The insurer believed Mr. Doughty's injuries were the responsibility of three contractors at the construction site, which had allegedly failed to provide an adequate fall arrest system. In May 2013, the insurer sued the three contractors in Connecticut Superior Court, seeking to recover the benefits it had paid Mr. Doughty under the common law theory of equitable subrogation.

In an order dismissing the action, the trial court reached two conclusions. First, it declined to recognize an insurer's right to subrogation for workers' compensation benefits. The statute which authorizes actions against third-party tortfeasors for workers' compensation claims, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-293, recognizes claims by employees and employers, but it is silent about claims by insurers. The court found that the statutory recognition of those claims represents "a deviation from the common law," and, therefore, that they must be strictly construed. It held that the statute may not be broadened to include another class of possible plaintiffs.

For the same reason, the court found that the common law claim of equitable subrogation, which Connecticut's Supreme Court had expressly recognized in the context of uninsured motorist coverage, Westchester Fire Ins. Co. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 236 Conn 362 (1996), should not be expanded to the "presently unrecognized context of workers' compensation."

The trial court also addressed a motion to substitute Mr. Doughty's employer, Reliable, as plaintiff in the case—a motion the insurer had filed in response to the defendants' motion to dismiss. The court found that the employer could not assert the insurer's equitable subrogation claim:

The substitution would necessarily change the cause of action from common-law equitable subrogation to a statutory right to recover under § 31–293 because the plaintiff Reliable Welding would be essentially asserting its own rights as an employer against the third-party tortfeasor and not the common-law subrogation right of the plaintiff [insurer]."

In effect, the trial court's ruling meant that parties who are otherwise liable for workplace injuries are immune to suit (at least to the extent of the amount covered by workers' compensation) in the majority of cases in which employers refrain from pursuing statutory actions.

The insurer appealed.

To Accomplish Justice

In the Supreme Court, the defendants repeated the arguments about the interaction of statutory and common law that had succeeded in the trial court. They contended that the workers' compensation statute abrogated the common law when it gave employers a right to sue third-party tortfeasors, because personal injury claims were not assignable at common law. Consequently, they maintained, the trial court was correct in finding that the statute must be strictly construed.

The Supreme Court found, however, that "there is a discernible difference between assignment and equitable subrogation, at least in the context of indemnity insurance."

In indemnity insurance, the insurer does not act as a 'mere volunteer,' and its obligation to pay the insured's loss predates the loss. Conversely, in an assignment, the assignee volunteers to pay the assignor for its loss only after the loss has occurred ... . Due to this difference, ...  the public policy reasons supporting the common-law prohibition against the assignment of personal injury claims [do] not apply to an indemnity insurer's right to equitable subrogation."

Thus, while assignment of personal injury claims was prohibited, the court explained, "equitable subrogation has long existed at common law." It cited Regan v. New York & New England Railroad Co., 60 Conn. 124, 131 (1891), which traced the right back into the Eighteenth Century. To abrogate the common law, therefore, the workers' compensation statute would have had to affirmatively eliminate insurer's subrogation rights. However, "[i]t is fundamental that if the legislature wishes to abrogate the common law, it must do so expressly." Because (as the defendants themselves had pointed out) the workers' compensation statute is silent about claims by insurers, the Supreme Court found that it could not be interpreted in a way that limited insurers' common law rights.

The court also found that equitable subrogation in the workers' compensation context is supported by two different elements of public policy. First,

allowing insurers to bring such actions serves the public policy of containing the cost of workers' compensation insurance. In some cases, employees and employers may have no incentive to bring an action against a third-party tortfeasor who has caused injury to the employee. ... In such cases, workers' compensation insurance carriers would be without recourse if we were to hold that they could not institute equitable subrogation claims against the third-party tortfeasor, and, thereby, the costs of workers' compensation would likely increase."

The court also found that

equitable subrogation actions prevent the unjust enrichment of tortfeasors in situations in which the employee and employer do not bring actions to recover damages caused by the tortfeasors."

In other words,

The object of [equitable] subrogation is the prevention of injustice. It is designed to promote and to accomplish justice."

A Never-Ending Battle For Justice

While recognizing an insurer's right to equitable subrogation in the abstract, the Supreme Court expressed no opinion as to whether the insurer in this case had "established a right to recover from the defendants." Rather cryptically, the court quoted Allstate Ins. Co. v. Palumbo, 296 Conn. 253 (2010), for the proposition that

[o]rdering subrogation depends on the equities and attending facts and circumstances of each case. ... The determination of what equity requires in a particular case, the balancing of the equities, is a matter for the discretion of the trial court."

In Palumbo, the court had wrestled with the question of whether a homeowner's insurer could pursue an equitable subrogation claim against an insured's fiancé, who had started a fire in the insured home. Because the home was the fiancé's sole residence, and because he had paid for numerous improvements to the home, the court found it would be inequitable to allow the insurer to pursue subrogation against him.

In Champion Steel, on the other hand, the Supreme Court had already found that permitting a workers' compensation insurer to pursue an equitable subrogation claim against a third-party tortfeasor "is designed to promote and accomplished justice." It is hard to see what more the insurer will have to show to demonstrate a right to relief under that theory. Nevertheless, the court remanded the case to the trial court to determine whether the insurer has established its right to recover from the defendants, "depending on the equities and attending facts and circumstances of [the] case."

In balancing the equities, the trial court should consider, among other things, if subrogation is denied, whether either Doughty or the defendants will be unjustly enriched, the impact of our public policies of containing the cost of the workers' compensation system and disfavoring economic waste, and the expectations of the parties."

It appears, therefore, that the trial court will have to cover much of the same ground that the Supreme Court already claimed to have cleared. The Supreme Court also noted that the insurer, as a subrogee of the employer, is subject to the same statutory obligations that would apply to the employer, including its notice and apportionment provisions.

For the moment, justice has not yet been "accomplished." But the arc of the moral universe appears to be bending in its direction.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions