Scaia's Case
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
1Opinion of the CourtQua, J.
The question in these cases is whether there was any evidence to warrant the finding of the board that the two employees were entitled to double compensation on the ground, that they were injured “by reason of the serious and wilful misconduct” of one Sibley, who could be found to have been “regularly intrusted with and exercising the *433powers of superintendence ” in behalf of the employer. G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 152, § 28, as appearing in St. 1943, c. 529, § 9. The Superior Court dismissed both claims for double compensaition.
Both employees worked for Deerfield Glassine Company in Monroe. On June…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Commonwealth v. WelanskyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1944
- Burns's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Aiken v. Holyoke Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1903
- Nickerson's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1914
- Beckles's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1918
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Sheehan v. GorianskyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
- Sandler v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1995
- Dillon's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1949
- Falls v. MortensenOregon Supreme Court · 1956
- DiGloria v. Chief of Police of MethuenMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1979
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.