Weaver's Case

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Weaver's Case

349 N.E.2d 895, 4 Mass. App. Ct. 820, 1976 Mass. App. LEXIS 612

DecidedJune 24, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 349 N.E.2d 895 (Weaver's Case) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Appeals Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Weaver's Case, 349 N.E.2d 895, 4 Mass. App. Ct. 820, 1976 Mass. App. LEXIS 612 (Mass. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

A single issue is raised on appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court denying an employee’s claim for permanent and total disability under G. L. c. 152, § 34A. In light of the disclosure to the Superior Court judge that a supplemental medical report from the impartial physician had been obtained in violation of the rules of the Industrial Accident Board and that the reviewing board had passed upon it without according the insurer an opportunity for rebuttal, the judge was warranted in recommitting the case to the board to give the insurer an opportunity to rebut the report so that a decision might be made upon a complete record. The Superior Court has broad power to recommit a case to the board where justice so requires. DaLomba’s Case, 352 Mass. 598, 602 (1967). Sabbagh’s Case, 346 Mass. 504, 507 (1963). Johnson’s Case, 242 Mass. 489, 495-496 (1922). Brown’s Case, 228 Mass. 31, 38 (1917). Locke, Workmen’s Compensation, § 585 (1968). It is not argued that there was error in the ultimate decision made by the court on the record returned by the board following remand.

Judgment affirmed.

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

A single issue is raised on appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court denying an employee’s claim for permanent and total disability under G. L. c. 152, § 34A. In light of the disclosure to the Superior Court judge that a supplemental medical report from the impartial physician had been obtained in violation of the rules of the Industrial Accident Board and that the reviewing board had passed upon it without according the insurer an opportunity for rebuttal, the judge was warranted in recommitting the case to the board to give the insurer an opportunity to rebut the report so that a decision might be made upon a complete record. The Superior Court has broad power to recommit a case to the board where justice so requires. DaLomba’s Case, 352 Mass. 598, 602 (1967). Sabbagh’s Case, 346 Mass. 504, 507 (1963). Johnson’s Case, 242 Mass. 489, 495-496 (1922). Brown’s Case, 228 Mass. 31, 38 (1917). Locke, Workmen’s Compensation, § 585 (1968). It is not argued that there was error in the ultimate decision made by the court on the record returned by the board following remand.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

349 N.E.2d 895, 4 Mass. App. Ct. 820, 1976 Mass. App. LEXIS 612, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weavers-case-massappct-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack