Dennis Driscoll, Esq., 234 Church Street, 7th Floor, New Haven, CT 06510, appeared for the Claimant
Kristen Sotnik Falls, Esq., One Church Street, New Haven, CT 06510, appeared for the Respondent
FINDING OF DISMISSAL
Pursuant to statutory notice, formal hearings were held on April 27, 1998, August 3, 1998, February 17, 1999, October 4, 1999, November 4, 1999, February 28, 2000, April 25, 2000 and the matter was continued until October 11, 2000 for the filing of proposed findings of fact and legal briefs.
1. In April and May, 1996, the Claimant was employed by United Illuminating as a line
worker.
2. The Claimant's duties as a line worker required her to climb poles and work with
wires and transformers.
3. The Claimant's work as a line worker required her to occasionally work in areas
where there was tall grass, bushes and leaves.
4. For a period of time between April and May, 1996 the Claimant worked along the
beach area in Milford, Connecticut replacing wires and equipment.
5. While working as a line worker, the Claimant was required to wear long pants, work
boots, a long sleeved shirt, hard hat and thick rubber gloves.
6. When the Claimant wore her work clothing only her face and neck were exposed.
7. The Claimant was not provided with sprays, repellants or other materials to assist in
the prevention of tick bites.
8. During the period of April and May, 1996, the Claimant began to experience back
9. On May 23, 1996, the Claimant filed a First Report of Occupational Injury or Illness
with the Respondent for a back injury.
10. In June 1996, the Claimant's personal physician, Dr. Ricardo Ruiz, started her on a
course of antibiotics.
11. On June 14, 1996, the Claimant filed a First Report of Occupational Injury or Illness
with the Respondent based upon an alleged diagnosis of Lyme disease.
12. In her injury report of June 1996, the Claimant alleged that she contacted Lyme
disease during the course of her employment with United Illuminating.
13. In her injury report the Claimant alleges that she had been bitten by a tick at work
between April 19, 1996 and May 1, 1996.
14. On October 24, 1996 the Claimant filed a Form 30C Notice of Claim with United
Illuminating for the alleged Lyme disease condition.
15. The Respondent contested the Lyme disease claim by filing a Form 43.
16. Lyme disease is a multi-symptom illness spread by the bite of a deer tick, and it is
caused by a bacteria known as Borrelia burgdorferi, which is a spirochete, which is a very unusual bacteria and it can cause problems in the nervous system, muscle and joint problems symptoms of chronic fatigue and flu like symptoms.
17. The Claimant never observed a deer tick on her person while working for United
Illuminating.
18. The Claimant was unable to state that she was aware of any tick bite she may have
sustained in the spring of 1996.
19. The Claimant was unable to state where or when she was bitten by a deer tick in the
spring of 1996.
20. The Claimant did not sustain a "bulls eye rash" that occurs in approximately 60 to
90% of the people that experience a deer tick bite.
21. Lyme disease occurs within 3 to 30 days after a tick bite and the common clinical
finding is the "bulls eye rash" (Respondent's Exhibit 13 at page 44).
22. The Claimant has treated with the following doctors during the coursed of her
treatment of the alleged Lyme disease condition: Ricardo Ruiz, M.D., Lauren Leong, M.D., Sonia Gordon-Dole, M.D., Bruce Haak, M.D., Janine Evans, M.D., Euardo Anhalt, M.D., Stephen Phillips, M.D., John Edalglass, M.D., Brian Fallon, M.D., Dr. Galumby, Samuel Donta, M.D., Mark Milner, M.D., Robin Ritterman, M.D.
23. The Claimant was also examined by Dr. Vijay Sikand upon the request of the
Respondent.
24. Dr. Ruiz, Dr. Anhalt, Dr. Phillips, Dr. Fallon and Dr. Ponte are of the opinion that the
Claimant has Lyme disease.
25. Dr. Evans and Dr. Sikand are of the opinion that the Claimant does not have Lyme
disease.
26. The Claimant has had numerous types of treatment ranging from antibiotic
medications to a series of 57 "dives" in a hyperbaric oxygen chamber.
27. The Claimant has even obtained a drug known as "Rulid" that was not approved by
the Federal Drug Administration; this drug was obtained by the Claimant in Poland, Mexico and Germany.
28. Dr. Phillips prescribed the Rulid for the Claimant.
29. Dr. Phillips is board certified in internal medicine.
30. Dr. Phillips is the Claimant's treating physician.
31. Dr. Phillips testified by deposition.
32. Dr. Phillips claims that the Claimant has Lyme disease based on his reading of
ELISA and Western blot test in addition to the Claimant's symptoms.
33. Dr. Sikand is board certified in three medical fields.
34. Dr. Sikand testified by deposition.
35. Dr. Sikand has been involved in Lyme disease research since 1985.
36. Dr. Sikand is of the opinion that the Claimant's ELISA and Western blot test do not
result in a positive test for Lyme disease.
37. Dr. Sikand reviewed an extensive amount of the Claimant's medical records.
38. Dr. Sikand is of the opinion that the Claimant's treatment was "far from the standard
of care and highly inappropriate."
39. Dr. Sikand has indicated that there is no doubt in his mind that the Claimant does not
have Lyme disease.
40. Dr. Sikand is the lead investigator for the Lyme disease vaccine that was licensed by
the Food and Drug Administration in 1998.
41. Dr. Sikand treats a large number of patients for Lyme disease.
42. Dr. Durland Fish is an assistant professor of Epidemiology and Public Health at Yale
University.
43. Over the last 15 years, Dr. Fish has worked on research projects that pertain to ticks
and tick borne diseases.
44. Dr. Fish has testified on behalf of the Respondent.
45. Dr. Fish is of the opinion that Lyme disease is a "para domestic disease" which is a
disease that people get close to home.
46. Dr. Fish indicated that 70% of the people bitten by ticks acquired the ticks near their
home and in less than 10% of the cases the people reported having acquired a tick bite at work.
47. Dr. Fish is of the opinion that because Lyme disease is a para-domestic disease it is as
much a hazard to the general public as it is to line workers.
48. Kirby Stafford, Ph.D. testified for the Claimant.
49. Dr. Stafford is the Chief Scientist and Entomologist of the Department of Forestry
and Horticulture at the Connecticut Experimental Station.
50. Dr. Stafford is of the opinion that is more likely than not that the Claimant could have
sustained a tick bite while working as a line worker for United Illuminating.
51. Since 1991 the Claimant has resided in a residential neighborhood in Hamden,
Connecticut.
52. The Claimant had a yard with a garden that she maintained herself.
53. The Claimant's home is a half mile from the Quinnipiac River and is also located
near East Rock Park.
54. The Claimant would take her dog walking in East Rock Park and Sleeping Giant State
Park.
55. Dr. Stafford indicated that an individual can get a tick bite in their own backyard as
likely as they could anywhere else.
56. Deer ticks feed on deer, small mammals such as mice, and they also can be
transported by household pets.
57. Deer ticks can also be found on leaves, bushes and grass and can come into contact
with people and animals when they pass by.
58. It takes approximately 36 to 48 hours for a deer tick to transmit Lyme disease to a
human.
59. UPON ALL THE EVIDENCE BEFORE ME, I FIND AND CONCLUDE:
A. In April and May 1996, the Claimant was employed by United Illuminating as
a line worker.
B. The Claimant alleges that she has been diagnosed with Lyme disease and that this was due to a deer tick bite she sustained while working as a line worker in April or May, 1996.
C. The Claimant does not know when or where the alleged tick bite occurred.
D. The Claimant never saw a deer tick on her body.
E. The Claimant never removed a deer tick from her body.
F. The Claimant did not sustain a "bulls eye rash" that occurs in approximately 60 to 90% of the people that experience a deer tick bite.
G. The Claimant had a fairly active outdoor life and if she in fact had been bitten by a deer tick it could have occurred during her normal life activities.
H. A person can obtain a tick bite in their own backyard just as likely as they could obtain it anywhere else.
I. The Claimant has failed to sustain her burden of proof that she was bitten by a deer tick in the course of her employment with United Illuminating.
J. In addition to the lack of sufficient evidence to show that the Claimant has work related Lyme disease it is certainly questionable as to whether the medical evidence even supports the diagnosis of Lyme disease.
WHEREFORE, it is found that the Claimant failed to sustain her burden of proof under C.G.S. 31-275(1), in that she has not shown sufficient evidence to indicate that she was bitten by a deer tick during the course of her employment with United Illuminating, and therefore the claim for work related Lyme disease is DISMISSED.
______________________________
GEORGE WALDRON
COMMISSIONER
THIRD DISTRICT
The Lyme Disease Network of NJ, Inc.
43 Winton Road
East Brunswick, NJ 08816 http://www.lymenet.org/
