Publications
April 4, 2019 Article

Maine WC Alert: Appellate Division Reiterates Requirement to Trigger Retirement Presumption

Maine Workers' Comp Alert

Maine Workers' Comp Appellate Division Reiterates That Working in Customary Job Until Retirement Constitutes “Termination of Active Employment” Sufficient to Trigger the Retirement Presumption

In Capitan v. NewPage Paper (WCB 19-10 [App. Div. April 2, 2019]), the employee appealed a decision denying her Petitions for Restoration and Review due to the “retirement presumption.” Under the “retirement presumption” (Section 223 of the Act), an employee who terminates active employment and is receiving nondisability pension or retirement benefits is presumed not to have a loss of earnings as the result of compensable injury or disease under this Act. This presumption may be rebutted only by evidence that the employee is medically totally incapacitated.

The employee worked at the NewPage paper mill, performing jobs that included cleaning paper machines, janitorial work, and work in the quality assurance lab. She officially retired from NewPage in December 2011 and began to receive a nondisability pension. Shortly thereafter, she started receiving Social Security retirement benefits, retroactive to January 1, 2012. In her last days at NewPage, the employee performed modified janitorial work and work in the quality assurance lab. She had some work restrictions due to work injuries. At the time of retirement, however, she was working full-time and no doctor had taken her out of work.

The Appellate Division affirmed the administrative law judge’s (ALJ’s) finding that the employee “terminate[d] active employment” when she retired. The employee relied on an opinion of a section 312 examiner who, having examined her after she retired, opined: “the culmination of her multiple sites with orthopedic problems [was] consistent with her decision to retire.” However, at the time of retirement, the employee was performing full-time work consistent with the work she had been performing for years before her retirement, and that, although she was working with restrictions, no doctor had taken her out of work. The section 312 examiner’s opinion could have possibly foreclosed work during that period, but Ms. Capitan did in fact work until her retirement. Thus, the employee terminated active employment when she retired. Moreover, the employee failed to rebut the presumption with evidence that she was unable to perform work suitable to her qualifications.

Firm Highlights

Publication

Maine WC Appellate Division Addresses Refusal of Suitable Work and Notice

The Maine Workers' Compensation Appellate Division recently addressed cases dealing with refusal of suitable work and notice. Both decisions rely heavily on the specific facts of each case. In the context of a refusal...

Publication

Maine WC Alert: Latest Appellate Division Rulings on Health Insurance Payments, Social Security Benefits

The Maine Workers' Comp Appellate Division recently issued rulings in the cases of Rich v. Maine Turnpike Authority and Butler v. City of Portland. Health Insurance Payments Made by Self-Insured Employer for Health Insurance...

Publication

Maine WC Alert: New Legislation Brings Procedural Changes, Benefit Modifications

LD 756 (“ An Act To Improve the Maine Workers’ Compensation Act of 1992 ”), was signed into law by Governor Mills on June 17, 2019. LD 756 has an effective date of September...

Publication

Maine WC Alert: Appellate Division Clarifies Section 327 Death Presumption

Maine Workers' Compensation Appellate Division Clarifies Burdens of Production and Proof Regarding Notice in the Context of the Section 327 Death Presumption In Estate of Deyone v. ITG Brands, LLC (WCB App. Div. 19-7...

Publication

Maine WC Alert: Updated Version of Notice of Controversy (WCB-9) Must Be Used Effective February 1, 2020

Following the recent statutory changes to the Workers’ Compensation Act, the Maine Workers’ Compensation Board has updated the language in Box 22 of the Notice of Controversy. This new version should be used as...

Publication

Maine WC Alert: Appellate Division Rules on Apportionment Relief in the Context of Self-Insurance and “Changed Circumstances” on a Petition for Review

The Appellate Division recently held that apportionment relief is equally available in cases involving a single self-insured employer whose claims are administered by multiple third-party administrators (TPAs) and that separation from employment is sufficient...

Publication

Maine WC Alert: Appellate Division Rules No Consequences Under 218 for Deferment of Receipt of Old-Age Social Security Benefits

In Pratt v. S.D. Warren (No. 19-3 [WCB App. Div. April 30, 2019]), S.D. Warren appealed a decision denying its Petition for Approval of Discontinuance of Incapacity Benefits. An employer may reduce incapacity benefits...

Publication

Maine WC Alert: MAE Unit Publishes Guidance on Compliance with Recent Amendments

The Maine Workers’ Compensation Board’s Monitoring, Audit & Enforcement Unit has issued a document to provide guidance on complying with certain recent amendments to the Workers’ Compensation Act in P.L. 2019, c. 344 (LD...

Publication

Maine WC Alert: Appellate Division Upholds Ruling on Reinstatement Provisions and Termination of Benefits

Maine WC Appellate Division Holds That Ongoing Noncompliance with Reinstatement Provisions in Section 218 Precludes Termination of Benefits for Expiration of Durational Cap Under 213 Section 218 of the Maine Workers’ Compensation Act provides...

Publication

Maine WC Alert: Appellate Division Addresses the Issue of Timely Notice in Two Recent Decisions

For claims for which the date of injury is on or after January 1, 2013, unless otherwise provided by the Maine Workers' Compensation Act, proceedings may not be maintained unless notice of an injury...