Legal Opinion

Morrissette v. Kimberly-Clark Corp.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided December 4, 2003PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClifford, J.

[¶ 1] Kimberly-Clark Corporation appeals from a decision of a hearing officer of the Workers’ Compensation Board (Elwin HO) granting the petition of its employee, Anita Morrissette, for restoration of benefits. Kimberly-Clark contends that the retroactive application of 39-A M.R.S.A. § 224 (Supp.2002) to determine Morris-sette’s level of benefits was a violation of the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers because it altered a previous calculation of benefits made consistent with our decision in Bernard v. Mead Publ’g Paper Din, 2001 ME 15, 765 A.2d 576. We disagree with…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1995
  2. General Motors Corp. v. RomeinSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  3. Riley v. Bath Iron Works Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1994
  4. Gauthier's CaseSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1921
  5. Dobson v. Quinn Freight Lines, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1980

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Christine S. Angell v. Renald C. HalleeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2014
  2. Grubb v. S.D. Warren Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2003
  3. Robert E. Dupuis v. Roman Catholic Bishop of PortlandSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2025
  4. Wellman v. SCHAD EXCAVATION, LLCSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2009
  5. Grubb v. S.D. Warren Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2003

1 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