Opinion

Stilson v. Dexter Shoe Co.

  • 762 A.2d 936
  • 2000 ME 208
  • 2000 Me. LEXIS 214
Court
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
Filed
Dec 5, 2000
Status
Published
On the bench
Alexander, Calkins, Clifford, Dana, Saufley, Wathen
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 52.6%

The opinion

PER CURIAM.

The employer, Dexter Shoe Co., appeals from a decision of a hearing officer of the Workers’ Compensation Board granting the employee’s petition for restoration and awarding 100% partial incapacity benefits based on the combination of a partially incapacitating injury and the unavailability of work within her restrictions. We agree with Dexter that the hearing officer erred in applying 39-A M.R.S.A. §§ 212, 213, 214 (Pamph.2000) to determine Stilson’s entitlement to benefits for a 1988 date of injury. P.L.1991, ch. 885, § A-10; see Tripp v. Philips Elmet Corp., 676 A.2d 927, 928, n. 1 (Me.1996). The applicable provision for Stilson’s date of injury is former 39 M.R.S.A. § 55-B (1989), repealed by P.L.1991, ch. 885, § A-7. Although work was available within the employee’s community, see 39-A M.R.S.A. § 102(6) (Pamph.2000), the hearing officer concluded that her lack of a driver’s license made those jobs unavailable. Because the Court is evenly divided, we affirm the hearing officer’s award of 100% partial incapacity benefits.

The entry is:

Judgment vacated only with respect to the application of 39-A M.R.S.A. § 213, 214 (Pamph.2000). Remanded to the Board for an award of 100% partial incapacity benefits pursuant to 39 M.R.S.A. § 55-B (1989), repealed and replaced by P.L.1991, ch. 885, §§ A-7, A-8. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.