A Connecticut Appellate Court panel affirmed the decision of the Compensation Review Board to uphold the Workers' Compensation commissioner for the Eighth District's determination that a per diem employee was not entitled to full salary disability benefits.

The plaintiff, George Kelly, argued that the commissioner's decision should not have relied on a supersedence appendix and cost sheet for "substantive purposes" and failed to assign the burden of proving the plaintiff was not entitled to benefits to the defendant, the opinion said.

In addition, the plaintiff claimed that the commissioner's decision had inconsistent conclusions after the plaintiff's motion to correct. Further, the plaintiff contended that the decision had wrongly concluded that a 1989 memorandum of agreement between the plaintiff's union and the state superseded a disability compensation statute for per diem employees, and improperly found that a 1993 collective bargaining agreement, which added psychiatrists as per diem employees, did not need to go through "a new supersedence process."