Legal Opinion

Palmer v. Bath Iron Works Corp.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided May 26, 1989PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

McKUSICK, Chief Justice.

Sustaining Joel Palmer’s workers’ compensation appeal, we hold that the Early-Pay System, 39 M.R.S.A. § 51-B (Pamph.1988), imposes a duty on any employer that does not accept a claim for permanent impairment to file a timely notice of controversy, even if the employee’s notice of claim does not specify the precise percentage of impairment claimed. Palmer injured his back in 1984 in the course of his *341employment as a brick mason at the Bath Iron Works (BIW) shipyard. On April 2, 1986, BIW’s insurer, Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., received a letter from Palmer’s attorney…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. Maine State Employees Ass'nSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1984
  2. Stickles v. United Parcel ServiceSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1989
  3. Clark v. DeCoster Egg FarmsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1980
  4. Kuvaja v. Bethel Savings BankSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1985
  5. Marie Theriault v. The Honorable Joseph E. BrennanCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1981

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Wright v. Saco School DepartmentSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1992

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

Powered by the Exa API