Legal Opinion

Harvie v. Bath Iron Works Corp.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided July 14, 1989PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

COLLINS, Justice.

In a consolidated appeal, William Harvie and Daniel Ventry challenge the rulings of the Appellate Division of the Workers’ Compensation Commission denying them recovery for injuries sustained at work. Because the time lapse of more than two years from the injuries and last payment to the time the claims were made bars both claims under 39 M.R.S.A. § 95 (Pamph. 1988), we affirm the Appellate Division.

Both men were injured in separate incidents at the Bath Iron Works in 1979. Ventry slipped on pipes and twisted his ankle. He was voluntarily paid benefits without the filing of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Pino v. Maplewood Packing Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1977
  2. Lagasse v. Hannaford Bros. Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1985
  3. Pottle v. Bath Iron Works Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1988

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Henriksen v. CameronSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1993
  2. Kennedy v. Brunswick Convalescent CenterSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1991
  3. Morrissette v. Kimberly-Clark Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2003
  4. Wilson v. Bath Iron WorksSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2008
  5. Patriotti v. General Electric Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1991

8 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