Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 39
Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 39, § 103-E (2026)

Enforcement of division

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(REPEALED)
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1981, c. 514, §6 (NEW). PL 1981, c. 698, §198 (AMD). PL 1991, c. 885, §A7 (RP). PL 1991, c. 885, §§A9-11 (AFF).
The Revisor's Office cannot provide legal advice or interpretation of Maine law to the public.
If you need legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1982–1996 · leading case: Armistead v. C & M Transp., Inc., 49 F.3d 43 (1st Cir. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Armistead v. C & M Transp., Inc., 49 F.3d 43 (1st Cir. 1995). · cites it 3× “The complaint alleged a right to relief by virtue of the superior court’s equitable power to enforce Commission orders under the Workers’ Compensation Act, 39 M.R.S.A. § 103-E. Count 1 sought enforcement of the award against C & M; count 2 sought a declaration that Travelers…”
Guar. Fund Mgmt. Servs. v. Workers' Comp. Bd., 678 A.2d 578 (Me. 1996). · cites it 3× “1995); 39 M.R.S.A § 103-E (1989), repealed by P.”
Banker v. Bath Iron Works Corp., 507 A.2d 602 (Me. 1986). · cites it 2× “He filed the commission’s order with that court, which, acting pursuant to 39 M.R.S.A. § 103-E (Pamph. 1985-1986), entered a pro forma decree that tracked the commission’s order word-for-word.”
Pomerleau v. United Parcel Serv., 455 A.2d 950 (Me. 1983). · cites it 2× “On November 23,1981, Pomerleau moved in Superior Court, Kennebec County, for an enforcement order under 39 M.R.S.A. § 103-E to require the appellants to pay him a sum of money representing the total amount of his award.”
Lucas v. E.A. Buschmann, Inc., 656 A.2d 1193 (Me. 1995). “The Act permits an employee to bring an action in the Superior Court to enforce any Board decision, order or award, including an award of fees and therefore, contrary to Lucas’s contention, this interpretation of section 104-A does not leave employees without a method of…”
Prout v. Bluebird Ranch, Inc., 440 A.2d 1047 (Me. 1982). “A new provision for enforcement in Superior Court of decisions by the Commission, effective the same date, appears in 39 M.R.S.A. § 103-E, enacted in P.L.1981, ch.”
Soule v. Stinson Canning Co., 537 A.2d 1152 (Me. 1988). “39 M.R.S.A. § 103-E (Pamph.1987) specifically directs and authorizes the Superior Court to render a pro forma decree in accordance with an order of the commission filed with it by any party in interest.”
Cilley v. Georgia-Pac. Corp., 519 A.2d 191 (Me. 1986). “Cilley as awarded by the Workers’ Compensation Commission pursuant to 39 M.R.S.A. § 103-E (Pamph.1986) and assessing a per diem penalty for nonpayment pursuant to 39 M.”
Cook v. Greyhound Bus Lines, Inc., 659 A.2d 287 (Me. 1995). “39 M.R.S.A. § 103-E (1989), repealed and replaced by P.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.