Shink's Case

113 A. 32, 120 Me. 80, 1921 Me. LEXIS 13
CourtSupreme Judicial Court of Maine
DecidedMarch 25, 1921
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 113 A. 32 (Shink's Case) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Judicial Court of Maine primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Shink's Case, 113 A. 32, 120 Me. 80, 1921 Me. LEXIS 13 (Me. 1921).

Opinion

Deasy[ J.

In Mathias Gauthier’s Case, supra it was determined by this court that, under the Workmen’s Compensation Law, when an industrial accident occurs to an employee the rights and obligations of the parties become vested and fixed, and that such rights and obligations cannot be either destroyed or enlarged by subsequent legislation. This principle is based upon the plain mandates [81]*81of both the State and Federal constitutions. It is decisive of this case. The commission invokes Chapter 238 of the laws of 1919 as creating a liability on the part of the defendants to pay the expenses of a surgical operation for which admittedly there was no liability under the law in force at the date of the accident.

In accordance with the principle above stated this ruling must be reversed.

Appeal sustained.

Decree reversed.

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

Related

Barrett v. Herbert Engineering, Inc.
371 A.2d 633 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1977)
Hazzard v. Alexander
173 A. 517 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1934)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
113 A. 32, 120 Me. 80, 1921 Me. LEXIS 13, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shinks-case-me-1921.