Seitz v. L & R INDUSTRIES, INC., ETC.
Supreme Court of Rhode Island
1Dissent
KELLEHER, Justice, with whom BEVI-LACQUA, Chief Justice, joins,
dissenting.
Although my brother Weisberger has addressed the issue presented by the litigants in his usual scholarly fashion, I cannot subscribe to his rejection of Beulah’s petition because the rejection apparently overlooks the purposes of workers’ compensation, ignores past legislative actions as well as judicial pronouncements, and is motivated by an opening-the-floodgates fear that, in my opinion, is groundless.
An overriding objective of workers’ compensation legislation is to impose upon the employer the burden of caring for…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Wolfe v. Sibley Lindsay & Curr Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1975
- Digby v. DigbySupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1978
- Townsend v. Maine Bureau of Public SafetySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1979
- State v. CorreraSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1981
- Orthopedic Specialists, Inc. v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1978
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.