Legal Opinion
LaRochelle v. Crest Shoe Co.
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided March 9, 1995PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RUDMAN, Justice.
Crest Shoe Company (Crest) and its workers’ compensation insurers, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (Liberty Mutual) and Hanover Insurance Company (Hanover) appeal from decisions of the Appellate Division and the Workers’ Compensation Commission. Because we conclude that the phrase “pending appeal” in 39 M.R.S.A. § 104-A(1) (1989) refers to a period beginning with the notice of appeal, and does not include the prior pendency of a motion for findings of fact, we affirm the decision of the Appellate Division.
Georgette LaRochelle suffered a work-related injury in 1985, while…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Riley v. Bath Iron Works Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1994
- American Mut. Ins. Companies v. MurraySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1980
- Nielsen v. Burnham & Morrill, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1991
- Gallant v. Boise Cascade Paper GroupSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1981
- Estate of Stone v. HansonSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1993
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Bureau v. Staffing Network, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
- Bowie v. Delta Airlines, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1995
- Victor S. Urrutia v. Interstate Brands InternationalSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2018
- Mushero v. Lincoln Pulp & Paper Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
- State v. HarrisSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1999
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.