Davol, Inc. v. Souza

492 A.2d 145, 1985 R.I. LEXIS 503
CourtSupreme Court of Rhode Island
DecidedMay 9, 1985
DocketNo. 83-130-M.P.
StatusPublished

This text of 492 A.2d 145 (Davol, Inc. v. Souza) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Rhode Island primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Davol, Inc. v. Souza, 492 A.2d 145, 1985 R.I. LEXIS 503 (R.I. 1985).

Opinion

OPINION

BEVILACQUA, Chief Justice.

The employee, John Souza, Jr., seeks counsel fees for having successfully defended a petition for writ of certiorari that sought to review a decision of the State Director of Labor granting the employee’s request for payment of medical bills pursu[146]*146ant to G.L.1956 (1979 Reenactment) § 28-33-9.1

The employee filed a petition with the director of labor pursuant to § 28-33-9, alleging that he sustained noise-induced loss of hearing in the course of his employment. He requested payment of a $130 medical bill and counsel fees.

The director subsequently found that the employee had suffered an injury arising out of his employment that resulted in no incapacity; however, the director found that employer was liable for the injury and that the medical services rendered were necessary for the proper treatment of the injury. He accordingly ordered employer to pay employee’s medical bill and counsel fees. The employer’s petition for a writ of certiorari was denied by the court.

The sole issue before the court is whether § 28-33-9 permits an award of counsel fees for successfully defending against a petition for writ of certiorari. For the following reasons, we believe the director of labor is permitted to make such an award.

We note at the outset that G.L.1956 (1979 Reenactment) § 28-35-322 applies only to proceedings before the Workers’ Compensation Commission and not to matters, such as those in the instant case, coming within the jurisdictional purview of the director of labor.

Section 28-33-9 provides in pertinent part:

“The director of labor shall award costs, including counsel fees and fees for medical and other expert witnesses to employees who successfully prosecute petitions for medical expenses in proceedings under this section. Such costs shall be assessed against the employer by the director of labor and shall be made part of the decision. (Emphasis added.)

In the case before us employee has successfully filed a petition for medical ex-[147]*147penses under the provisions of § 28-33-9. Successful prosecution necessarily entails defending an award on appellate review. Although the statute does not make explicit provision for an award of counsel fees in an instance in which review by writ of certiorari has been sought, an award of counsel fees in the circumstances is consonant with the intent of the statute.

The director of labor is therefore empowered under the terms of § 28-33-9 to make an award of counsel fees to an employee who successfully defends an award of medical expenses against an employer’s petition for writ of certiorari.

The petition for counsel fees is allowed, and the case is remanded to the director of labor for an award of a reasonable fee.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
492 A.2d 145, 1985 R.I. LEXIS 503, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davol-inc-v-souza-ri-1985.