Legal Opinion

O'NEAL v. City of Augusta

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided March 9, 1998PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ROBERTS, Justice.

[¶ 1] The employers in this consolidated appeal challenge decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Board concluding that, for purposes of determining whether fringe benefits must be included in the average weekly wage, 39-A M.R.S.A. § 102(4)(H) (Supp. 1997), the determination whether a partially incapacitated employee’s weekly benefit exceeds 2/3 the state average weekly wage at the time of the injury must be based on actual weekly benefit levels, and not a onetime calculation based on what the employee could hypothetically receive for total incapacity. We affirm.

[¶ 2] The…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Jordan v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1994
  2. Bureau v. Staffing Network, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
  3. Tompkins v. Wade & Searway Construction Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1992
  4. Beaulieu v. Maine Medical CenterSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
  5. Tripp v. Philips Elmet Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hincks v. Robert Mitchell Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1999
  2. Ricci v. Mercy HospitalSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2002
  3. Coulombe v. Anthem Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Maine, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2002
  4. Brown v. Sappi Fine PaperSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2004

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

Powered by the Exa API