Jordan v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
1Opinion of the Court
GLASSMAN, Justice.
The employer, Sears, Roebuck & Company, appeals from a decision of the Appellate Division affirming the denial by the Workers’ Compensation Commission of the employer’s petition for coordination of benefits. The Commission held that, pursuant to 39 M.R.S.A. § 62-B (1989), 1 an employer is not entitled to a coordination of compensation benefits when an employee rolls pension benefits over into an individual retirement- account (IRA) until those funds are distributed from the IRA. We affirm the decision.
The record reflects the following undisputed facts: the employee, Kenneth…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Riley v. Bath Iron Works Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1994
- Nielsen v. Burnham & Morrill, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1991
- Davis v. Scott Paper Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1986
- Estate of Stone v. HansonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1993
- Marchand v. Eastern Welding Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1994
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by76 opinions
- Bureau v. Staffing Network, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
- Thibeault v. LarsonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1995
- Dumond v. Aroostook Van LinesSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
- Guaranty Fund Management Services v. Workers' Compensation BoardSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
- Pelletier v. Fort Kent Golf ClubSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1995
71 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.