Agreements
Affirms Gross v. Hannaford Brothers that mediation agreements are binding. Rambo v. William F. Porter, Inc. WCB 98006393 10/29/2000 BOARD
Alcohol and Substance Abuse
Board cannot decide, as a matter of law, that intoxicated employee's unexplained injuries are presumptively not work-related. Husvar v. Engineered Products, Inc. 755 A.2d 498 07/10/2000 WATHEN
Employer's intoxication defense only applies where work injuries result from the intoxication. Husvar v. Engineered Products, Inc. 755 A.2d 498 07/10/2000 WATHEN
Appeals
Appeals from Bureau of Insurance arbitrations are to be made to the Superior Court, as review of final agency action. Livingstone v. A-R Cable Services of ME 746 A.2d 901
02/04/2000 CLIFFORD
Court has very narrow scope of review of Board of Insurance arbitrator's decision, and could not say arbitrator exceeded its authority simply because it accepted a proposal that was inconsistent with the Board's findings, as arbitrator must select from among proposals submitted by insurers. Livingstone v. A-R Cable Services of ME 746 A.2d 901
02/04/2000 CLIFFORD
Employers have no right to appeal Board's decision to implement a vocational rehabilitation plan; only employers assessed costs for noncompliance with a plan may appeal. McAdam v. United Parcel Service 743 A.2d 741 01/12/2000 DANA
Arising Out Of - Public Streets
Rideshare provision did not apply where employer's van transported employees to work, but was also used for many other functions, as §201(2) applies only where the "sole purpose" of employer-provided transportation is to carry employees to and from work. Cortes v. Superior Forestry Me. District Court CV99-CV19 03/15/2000 BRODY
Arising Out Of - Specific Events
Board cannot decide, as a matter of law, that intoxicated employee's unexplained injuries are presumptively not work-related. Husvar v. Engineered Products, Inc. 755 A.2d 498 07/10/2000 WATHEN
Where hotel employee was shot and killed by coworker in dormitory for employees, court denied hotel's motion for summary judgment as it could not find that shooting was work-related as a matter of law. Connon v. The Colony Hotel York Sup.99-166 03/15/2000 BRENNAN
Attorney's Fees
Hearing officers lack authority to allow attorney's fees to be paid out of reimbursement to medical provider. Doucette v. Pathways, Inc. 759 A.2d 718 09/28/2000 ALEXANDER
Average Weekly Wage
Union-established benefit plan with contributions from employer is a fringe benefit, not to be calculated as part of the base average weekly wage. Hincks v. Robert Mitchell Co. 740 A.2d 992
11/24/1999 WATHEN
Apportionment
In a multiple-injury, multiple-insurer case, the fact that the second insurer paid benefits pursuant to its failure to file a timely notice of controversy does not preclude apportionment against the first insurer. Dorr v. The Bridge Construction Corp. 750 A.2d 597 05/19/2000 RUDMAN
Apportionment against first insurer was precluded where second insurer signed permanent impairment agreement regarding an injury for which the second insurer was the only one on the risk. Dorr v. The Bridge Construction Corp. 750 A.2d 597 05/19/2000 RUDMAN
Arbitration
Court has very narrow scope of review of Board of Insurance arbitrator's decision, and could not say arbitrator exceeded its authority simply because it accepted a proposal that was inconsistent with the Board's findings, as arbitrator must select from among proposals submitted by insurers. Livingstone v. A-R Cable Services of ME 746 A.2d 901
02/04/2000 CLIFFORD
Appeals from Bureau of Insurance arbitrations are to be made to the Superior Court, as review of final agency action. Livingstone v. A-R Cable Services of ME 746 A.2d 901
02/04/2000 CLIFFORD
Arising Out Of - General Rules
Employer's intoxication defense only applies where work injuries result from the intoxication. Husvar v. Engineered Products, Inc. 755 A.2d 498 07/10/2000 WATHEN
Benefits (Fringe)
Union-established benefit plan with contributions from the employer is a fringe benefit, not to be calculated as part of the base average weekly wage. Hincks v. Robert Mitchell Co. 740 A.2d 992
11/24/1999 WATHEN
Contracts
Work injury in North Dakota not covered by Maine Workers' Compensation Act where Maine employer's insurance specifically excluded comp coverage for work done in North Dakota. LM Insurance Corp. v. Welded Construction Co. __F.Supp.__ 02/15/2000 COHEN
Court allowed addition of breach of contract claim against employer based on allegations its comp coverage was practically worthless. LM Insurance Corp. v. Welded Construction Co. __F.Supp.__ 02/15/2000 COHEN
Death Benefits
A child born more than nine months after a work injury is not a dependent under the Act and thus not eligible for death benefits. Cribben v. Central Maine Home Improvements 754 A.2d 350
06/06/2000 DANA
Dependents
A child born more than nine months after a work injury is not a dependent under the Act and thus not eligible for death benefits. Cribben v. Central Maine Home Improvements 754 A.2d 350
06/06/2000 DANA
Divorce
Where employee put approximately $200,000 of his workers' compensation lump-sum settlement into an investment account, which grew to $292,748,`divorce court did not err in awarding $267,019.37 to the employee and the remaining $25,728.64 to his wife. Washburn v. Washburn Cum.Sup.99-48 06/27/2000 DELAHANTY
Employer
In determining whether the state is an employer of an assistant district attorney, the Court used the multi-factor test with the focus on whether the purported employer has control of important aspects of the job. Bloom v. David W. Crook 78 F.Supp.2d 1 12/09/1999 BRODY
Equity
While injured employee can be granted equitable bill for discovery to determine whether he has grounds for a civil lawsuit, court declined to do so here. Vermette v. Thomas Bridges York Sup.99-187 01/04/2000 FRITZSCHE
Evidence
Section 327 presumption of incapacity when employee is unable to testify does not apply simply because employee cannot recall events that left him incapacitated. Husvar v. Engineered Products, Inc. 755 A.2d 498 07/10/2000 WATHEN
Exclusivity Provision
Where home health nurse sued her employer for negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress based on job changes it requested upon her return from leave for depression, the claims were barred by the exclusivity provisions of the Act. Williams v. Healthreach Network Me. District Court CV990030B 02/22/2000 BRODY
Where plaintiff sued the president and another member of the family business for which she worked for intentional infliction of emotional distress, her claim was barred by the exclusivity provisions of the Workers' Compensation Act, as she failed to present any evidence that her emotional distress arose from events outside her workplace. Gordan v. Cummings 756 A.2d 942 07/25/2000 RUDMAN
Employee's tort claims for work injury allowable to the extent that they are based on injury to reputation or economic well-being, as these are not covered under the Act. Cole v. Chandler 752 A.2d 1189 04/03/2000 WATHEN
Employee's civil claims of negligent and intentional emotional distress, invasion of privacy, and interference with advantageous economic relations could encompass mental injuries that are compensable under the Act, and hence are barred by the Act. Cole v. Chandler 752 A.2d 1189 04/03/2000 WATHEN
Employee's tort claims against insurer for surveillance activities of private investigator, eight years after he left work, were not barred by the exclusivity provisions of the Act. Hawkes v. Private Investigation Services Cumb.Sup.98-270 04/03/2000 WARREN
First Report Of Injury
Section 106 of Title 39 required employers to fill out a First Report of Injury form and give the employee a copy in medical-only claims, but employers did not have to file the report unless there was lost work time. Joyce v. S.D. Warren 759 A.2d 712 09/28/2000 ALEXANDER
Gradual Injury
A gradual injury is essentially a single injury caused by years of repetitive trauma rather than a single traumatic incident, thus §201(4)(combined effects injuries) is not applicable unless the gradual injury combines with a preexisting condition. Derrig v. Fels Company 747 A.2d 580 11/18/1999 CALKINS
Hearing Officers
Hearing officers lack authority to allow attorney's fees to be paid out of reimbursement to medical provider. Doucette v. Pathways, Inc. 759 A.2d 718 09/28/2000 ALEXANDER
Where Deputy Director of Dispute Resolution office was vacant, hearing officer had authority to impose penalties under §360. Numberg v. Workers' Compensation Board Cum.Sup.99-50 04/27/2000 DELAHANTY
Incapacity, Extent Of -
General Rules
The Adams v. Mt. Blue holding that §54-B, total incapacity benefits, may be applied to partially incapacitated employees is applicable to injuries occurring after the effective date of the 1991 amendments to sections 54-B and 55-B as well. Lamphier v. Bath Iron Works Corp. 755 A.2d 489 05/03/2000 CALKINS
The 400-week limitation on partial benefits under §55-B refers to the number of weeks benefits are received rather than to calendar weeks. Williams v. E.J. Boulos Co. 747 A.2d 181
03/01/2000 WATHEN
Incapacity, Extent Of -
Specific Cases
Where employee attains education and actively seeks employment post-injury, with limited success, this constitutes a "change in circumstances" from the time his previous incapacity level was fixed and warrants an increase in benefits. McIntyre v. Great Northern Paper, Inc. 743 A.2d 744 01/12/2000 CLIFFORD
Independent Medical Examination
Board vacates decision of hearing officer to approve §312 examiner who is retired from active practice, even though he is on Board's list of examiners, as §312 examiners must have an active, treating practice. Simard v. Great Northern Paper Co. WCB 88071659
08/29/2000 BOARD
Insurance
Work injury in North Dakota not covered by Maine Workers' Compensation Act where Maine employer's insurance specifically excluded comp coverage for work done in North Dakota. LM Insurance Corp. v. Welded Construction Co. __F.Supp.__ 02/15/2000 COHEN
Claims of breach of good faith and fair dealing not allowed against insurers. Hawkes v. Private Investigation Services Cum.Sup.98-270 04/03/2000 WARREN
Intentional Injury
Employee's civil claims of negligent and intentional emotional distress, invasion of privacy, and interference with advantageous economic relations could encompass mental injuries that are compensable under the Act, and hence are barred by the Act. Cole v. Chandler 752 A.2d 1189 04/03/2000 WATHEN
Court refused summary judgment for employer on employee's claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress against insurer for surveillance activities of private investigator. Hawkes v. Private Investigation Services Cum.Sup.98-270 04/03/2000 WARREN
Where hotel employee shot and killed by coworker in dormitory for employees, court denied hotel's motion for summary judgment as court could not find that shooting was work-related as a matter of law. Connon v. The Colony Hotel York Sup.99-166 03/15/2000 BRENNAN
Lump-sum Settlements
Employee's tort claims against insurer for surveillance activities of private investigator, eight years after he left work, were not barred by lump-sum settlement release that did not cover common-law claims. Hawkes v. Private Investigation Services Cum.Sup.98-270 04/03/2000 WARREN
Where employee put approximately $200,000 of his workers' compensation lump-sum settlement into an investment account, which grew to $292,748, divorce court did not err in awarding $267,019.37 to the employee and the remaining $25,728.64 to his wife. Washburn v. Washburn Cum.Sup.99-48 06/27/2000 DELAHANTY
Maximum Medical Improvement
The finding of MMI is a one-time finding, based on the reasonable probability that the employee's condition will not improve. Williams v. E.J. Boulos Co. 747 A.2d 181 03/01/2000 WATHEN
Mediation
Affirms Gross v. Hannaford Brothers that mediation agreements are binding. Rambo v. William F. Porter, Inc. WCB 98006393 10/29/2000 BOARD
Medical Services And Supplies
Medical treatments to employee at employer's in-house medical department are not payments that begin the 10-year statute of limitations. Moreau v. S.D. Warren 748 A.2d 1001 04/12/2000 CALKINS
Section 51-B, Title 39 provided a procedural mechanism for benefits due under §52 but no independent entitlement to medical treatment, hence there is no distinction between medical payments made under §51-B or §52 for purposes of the statute of limitations. Moreau v. S.D. Warren 748 A.2d 1001 04/12/2000 CALKINS
Mental Injury And Stress
Where home health nurse sued her employer for negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress based on job changes it requested upon her return from leave for depression, the claims were barred by the exclusivity provisions of the Act. Williams v. Healthreach Network __F.Supp.__ 02/22/2000 BRODY
Where plaintiff sued the president and another member of the family business for which she worked for intentional infliction of emotional distress, her claim was barred by the exclusivity provisions of the Workers' Compensation Act, as she failed to present any evidence that her emotional distress arose from events outside her workplace. Gordan v. Cummings 756 A.2d 942 07/25/2000 RUDMAN
Employee's civil claims of negligent and intentional emotional distress, invasion of privacy, and interference with advantageous economic relations could encompass mental injuries that are compensable under the Act, and hence are barred by the Act. Cole v. Chandler 752 A.2d 1189 04/03/2000 WATHEN
Notice Of Controversy
In a multiple-injury, multiple-insurer case, the fact that the second insurer paid benefits pursuant to its failure to file a timely notice of controversy does not preclude apportionment against the first insurer. Dorr v. The Bridge Construction Corp. 750 A.2d 597 05/19/2000 RUDMAN
Penalties
Where Deputy Director of Dispute Resolution office was vacant, hearing officer had authority to impose penalties under §360. Numberg v. Workers' Compensation Board Cum.Sup.99-50 04/27/2000 DELAHANTY
Permanent Impairment
Apportionment against first insurer was precluded where second insurer signed permanent impairment agreement regarding an injury for which the second insurer was the only one on the risk. Dorr v. The Bridge Construction Corp. 750 A.2d 597 05/19/2000 RUDMAN
The finding of MMI is a one-time finding, based on the reasonable probability that the employee's condition will not improve. Williams v. E.J. Boulos Co. 747 A.2d 181 03/01/2000 WATHEN
In determining the extent of an employee's permanent impairment, the effects of more than one injury may be combined to arrive at the amount of impairment. Churchill v. Central Aroostook Assoc. for Retarded 742 A.2d 475 12/22/1999 CLIFFORD
Preexisting Condition/Combined Effects
A gradual injury is essentially a single injury caused by years of repetitive trauma rather than a single traumatic incident, thus §201(4)(combined effects injuries) is not applicable unless the gradual injury combines with a preexisting condition. Derrig v. Fels Company 747 A.2d 580 11/18/1999 CALKINS
Board erred in applying §201(4) on preexisting conditions before initial determination of whether employee had in fact suffered an injury. Derrig v. Fels Company 747 A.2d 580 03/07/2000 CALKINS
Section 201(6), providing that in multiple injury cases Title 39 applies to incapacity attributable to dates of injury before 1/1/93, is not retroactive. Churchill v. Central Aroostook Assoc. for Retarded 742 A.2d 475 12/22/1999 CLIFFORD
Section 201(6), providing that in multiple injury cases Title 39 applies to incapacity attributable to dates of injury before 1/1/93, is not retroactive. Hincks v. Robert Mitchell Co. 740 A.2d 992
11/24/1999 WATHEN
Procedure
Section 106 of Title 39 required employers to fill out a First Report of Injury form and give the employee a copy in medical-only claims, but employers did not have to file the report unless there was lost work time. Joyce v. S.D. Warren 759 A.2d 712 09/28/2000 ALEXANDER
Reinstatement
Plaintiff's demand for reinstatement denied where there were no job openings at the employer 's unless it bumped another employee or created a make-work position for the plaintiff. Quint v. A.E. Staley Manufacturing Co. 1999 WL 1957795 12/23/1999 BEAULIEU
Review
Where employee attains education and actively seeks employment post-injury, with limited success, this constitutes a "change in circumstances" from the time his previous incapacity level was fixed and warrants an increase in benefits. McIntyre v. Great Northern Paper, Inc. 743 A.2d 744 01/12/2000 CLIFFORD
Statute Of Limitations
In-house medical treatment by employer is not a payment pursuant to a decision and thus does not toll any statute of limitations under the Act. Joyce v. S.D. Warren 759 A.2d 712 09/28/2000 ALEXANDER
Section 51-B, Title 39 provided a procedural mechanism for benefits due under §52 but no independent intitlement to medical treatment, hence there is no distinction between medical payments made under §51-B or §52 for statute of limitations purposes. Moreau v. S.D. Warren 748 A.2d 1001 04/12/2000 CALKINS
Medical treatments to employee at employer's in-house medical department are not payments that begin the 10-year statute of limitations. Moreau v. S.D. Warren 748 A.2d 1001 04/12/2000 CALKINS
Statutory Construction
The Adams v. Mt. Blue holding that §54-B, total incapacity benefits, may be applied to partially incapacitated employees is applicable to injuries occurring after the effective date of the 1991 amendments to sections 54-B and 55-B as well. Lamphier v. Bath Iron Works Corp. 755 A.2d 489 05/03/2000 CALKINS
The 400-week limitation on partial benefits refers to the number of weeks benefits are received rather than to calendar weeks. Williams v. E.J. Boulos Co. 747 A.2d 18103/01/2000 WATHEN
Section 201(6), providing that in multiple injury cases Title 39 applies to incapacity attributable to dates of injury before 1/1/93, is not retroactive. Churchill v. Central Aroostook Assoc. for Retarded 742 A.2d 475 12/22/1999 CLIFFORD
Section 201(6), providing that in multiple injury cases Title 39 applies to incapacity attributable to dates of injury before 1/1/93, is not retroactive. Hincks v. Robert Mitchell Co. 740 A.2d 992
11/24/1999 WATHEN
Vocational Rehabilitation
Board's assessment against employer for costs of developing a rehabilitation plan vacated, because the plan had not been completed and the employee not returned to suitable employment. McAdam v. United Parcel Service 743 A.2d 741 01/12/2000 DANA
Employers have no right to appeal Board's decision to implement a vocational rehabilitation plan; only employers assessed costs for noncompliance with a plan may appeal. McAdam v. United Parcel Service 743 A.2d 741 01/12/2000 DANA
