Legal Opinion

Husvar v. Engineered Products, Inc.

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

Decided July 10, 2000PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRudman, J.

[¶ 1] Engineered Products, Inc. appeals from a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Board granting Joseph Husvar’s petition for award. The Board concluded that because Husvar suffered memory loss as a result of his injury and because he could not recall the circumstances of his injury, he is entitled to the benefit of a statutory presumption that his injury is work-related. See 39-A M.R.S.A. § 327 (Supp.1999). The Board also rejected Engineered’s reliance on the intoxication defense, 39-A M.R.S.A. § 202 (Supp.1999), concluding that while Husvar may have been intoxicated, he was not on duty…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Comeau v. Maine Coastal ServicesSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1982
  2. Morse v. Laverdiere's Super Drug StoreSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1994
  3. Dufour v. Internal Medicine AssociatesSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1998

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Standring v. Town of SkowheganSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2005
  2. Standring v. Town of SkowheganSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API