Opinion

Mouradian's Case

  • 344 Mass. 753
  • 182 N.E.2d 492
  • 1962 Mass. LEXIS 903
Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Filed
May 3, 1962
Status
Published
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 77.1%

The opinion

Final decree affirmed subject to amendment in respect of interest. The findings of the single member on adequate evidence, adopted by the reviewing board, established that the employee after his injury was incapable of doing his former heavy work and did do lighter work as a route salesman; also that in connection with his new job he had to pay $30 a week out of his own pocket to operate his automobile. The decision deducted this sum from gross weekly earnings in determining the post-injury net earnings in the computation of partial disability compensation. This was right. New Amsterdam Cas. Co. v. Stens, 288 Mass. 302, 303 . Powers’s Case, 275 Mass. 515 . That the employee answered affirmatively the question, “Would this be in the nature of a promotion for you?” did not require the finding that the new work and lesser pay were not caused by the injury. We have cheeked the computations of the decision and do not find error or material confusion therein as claimed by the insurer. The employee may have leave (as he has requested) to move in the Superior Court to amend the decree to include interest under G. L. c. 152, § 50. Costs and reasonable expenses under G. L. c. 152, § 11A, shall be allowed by the single justice.

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.