Legal Opinion
Curtis v. National Sea Products
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Decided April 7, 1995PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WATHEN, Chief Justice.
The employees, Peter Curtis and Norma Thompson, appeal from decisions of the Workers’ Compensation Board denying their petitions for commutation of benefits and holding that, pursuant to 39-A M.R.S.A. § 352 (Supp.1994), they are not entitled to a commutation of benefits without the consent of the insurer. Finding no error, we affirm.
Both employees in this consolidated appeal suffered work injuries in 1981 and filed petitions for lump-sum settlement in 1993 pursuant to section 71-A of former Title 39. See 39 M.R.S.A. § 71-A (1989), repealed and replaced by P.L.1991, ch.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Riley v. Bath Iron Works Corp.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1994
- Nielsen v. Burnham & Morrill, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1991
- Morgan-Leland v. University of MaineSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1993
3Cited by8 opinions
- Bureau v. Staffing Network, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
- Guaranty Fund Management Services v. Workers' Compensation BoardSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
- Bowie v. Delta Airlines, Inc.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1995
- Cust v. University of MaineSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2001
- Mushero v. Lincoln Pulp & Paper Co.Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1996
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.