Legal Opinion
Ray v. Carland Construction, Inc.
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided October 23, 1997PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ROBERTS, Justice.
[¶ 1] Both cases in this consolidated appeal from decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Board raise issues concerning the applicable law in successive injury cases. In the first case, Carland Construction, Inc., contends that the Board erred by basing an award of compensation on Donald P. Ray’s average weekly wage at the time of the first injury and including an inflation adjustment pursuant to former 39 M.R.S.A § 55-A (Supp.1987), repealed and replaced by P.L. 1987, ch. 559, part B, §§ 29, 30, codified at 39 M.R.S.A. § 55-B (1989). In the second case, Denyse Pelletier…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Bureau v. Staffing Network, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
- Musk v. NelsonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1994
- Dumond v. Aroostook Van LinesSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
- Tripp v. Philips Elmet Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
- Caron v. Maine School Administrative District No. 27Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1991
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Guiggey v. Great Northern Paper, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1997
- Cust v. University of MaineSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2001
- Temm v. S.D. Warren Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2005
- Hincks v. Robert Mitchell Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1999
- Loud v. Kezar Falls Woolen Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1999
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.