Simari's Case
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the Court
There was evidence in the several medical opinions received by the reviewing board which warranted its finding that the employee was “capable of light part-time sedentary work” and could, with treatment, resume full-time work. The decision of the board is to stand unless it is unsupported by evidence, including all rational inferences which may be drawn from it. Chapman’s Case, 321 Mass. 705, 707 (1947). Vouniseas’s Case, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 133, 134 (1975). Carnute’s Case, 10 Mass. App. Ct. 814, 815 (1980). It follows that the board was justified in concluding that the employee was not *905totally…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Kunen v. First Agricultural National BankMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1978
- Chapman's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1947
- Boss v. Travelers InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
- Vouniseas's CaseMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1975
- Amello's CaseMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Doyle v. Paul Revere Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998
- Avery's CaseMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1986
- Doyle v. Paul Revere LifeCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998
- Doyle v. Paul Revere Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998