Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Russell v. Duchess Footwear

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided February 1, 1985Published

1Concurrence

DUFRESNE, Active Retired Justice,

concurring.

I agree that the instant appeal must be dismissed. The appellant-employee’s petition for review of the decision of the Appellate Division of the Workers’ Compensation Commission (the Division) in this case was improvidently granted by this Court pursuant to 39 M.R.S.A. § 103-C(3).

The petition for award of compensation was initially denied by a single commissioner of the Workers’ Compensation Commission (the Commission) on March 31, 1983. The decision, however, so it is claimed, did not come to the attention of the employee’s *258attorney until late May,…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Securities & Exchange Commission v. SloanSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. DaLomba's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1967
  3. Conners' CaseSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1921
  4. Mailman v. Colonial Acres Nursing HomeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1980
  5. Waltz v. Boston & Rockland Transportation Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1965

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API