Legal Opinion
Cabral's Case
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided May 23, 1984PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtArmstrong, J.
Resolution of questions of procedure and jurisdiction presented by these cases necessitates recitation of the procedural history but not the facts relating to the underlying claim.
The employee was injured August 17, 1981, and was paid compensation by agreement from August 19. The weekly compensation under the agreement was $76.50, based on an average weekly wage of $114.75. At the time the payments were made, the agreement, dated November 30, 1981, had not been approved by the Division of Industrial Accidents (division) under G. L. c. 152, § 6, as amended by St. 1953, c. 314, § 6.
On August…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Cobbledick v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Cogen v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
- Borman v. BormanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979
- Foreign Auto Import, Inc. v. Renault Northeast, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
- Parker v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1942
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Arch Medical Associates, Inc. v. Bartlett Health Enterprises, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1992
- Smith v. Arbella Mutual InsuranceMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2000
- McCarthy v. Civil Service CommissionMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1992
- Bernardo's CaseMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1987