Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 39, § 52 (2026)

Duties and rights of parties as to medical and other services; cost

✓ 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(REPEALED)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 1965, c. 408, §1 (AMD). PL 1965, c. 489, §4 (AMD). PL 1967, c. 374, §2 (AMD). PL 1971, c. 246 (AMD). PL 1973, c. 389 (AMD). PL 1973, c. 571, §69 (AMD). PL 1973, c. 788, §222 (AMD). PL 1975, c. 148 (AMD). PL 1975, c. 302, §1 (AMD). PL 1975, c. 403 (AMD). PL 1977, c. 278, §§1,2 (AMD). PL 1977, c. 437, §2 (AMD). PL 1977, c. 612, §§4,5 (AMD). PL 1977, c. 696, §405 (AMD). PL 1979, c. 93 (AMD). PL 1979, c. 116 (AMD). PL 1981, c. 93 (AMD). PL 1983, c. 158 (AMD). PL 1985, c. 372, §§A11-14 (AMD). PL 1985, c. 729, §2 (AMD). PL 1987, c. 559, §§B19,B20 (AMD). PL 1989, c. 434, §8 (AMD). RR 1991, c. 1, §58 (COR). PL 1991, c. 615, §§C4,5 (AMD). PL 1991, c. 885, §A7 (RP). PL 1991, c. 885, §§A9-11 (AFF).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases, 1970–2018 · leading case: Gaetan H. Bourgoin v. Twin Rivers Paper Co., LLC, 2018 ME 77 (Me. 2018).
Gaetan H. Bourgoin v. Twin Rivers Paper Co., LLC, 2018 ME 77 (Me. 2018). · cites it 2× “¶¶ 10, 15 (holding that a part-time assistant and van to accommodate a wheelchair were reasonable and 15 Before 1992, the WCA’s “reasonable and proper” language was contained in 39 M.R.S.A. § 52 (1964), but after the Act was overhauled in 1992, the same language became part of…”
Lancaster v. Cooper Indus., 387 A.2d 5 (Me. 1978). · cites it 3× “Appellee then filed a petition seeking an award of vocational rehabilitation under 39 M.R.S.A. § 52. *7 Finding that appellee was only partially incapacitated but that he had “made reasonable efforts to seek work commensurate with his physical limitations but such work is not…”
Cote v. Georgia-Pac. Corp., 596 A.2d 1004 (Me. 1991). · cites it 3× “39 M.R.S.A. § 52 (1989). Unless claimant’s right to reimbursement can be clearly said to come under the provisions of this statute, he is not legally entitled to recover his expenses for housekeeping services.”
Ross v. Oxford Paper Co., 363 A.2d 712 (Me. 1976). “§ 51, the section pertaining to eligibility for compensation, although the phrase was deleted by the 1973 Legislature from 39 M.R.S.A. § 52, the section which enables a claimant to receive certain medical services if he is otherwise qualified under the Act.”
Brawn v. Gloria's Country Inn, 1997 ME 191 (Me. 1997). · cites it 2× “” 39 M.R.S.A. § 52 (1989), repealed and replaced by P.”
Liberty Mut. Ins. v. Weeks, 404 A.2d 1006 (Me. 1979). “Since we are concerned here with statutory liabilities of the carrier as juxtaposed against the common law liability of a third person, we group the carrier’s liabilities under the generic term “compensation benefits.”
Towle v. Dep't of Transp., State High., 318 A.2d 71 (Me. 1974). · cites it 2× “NOTES [1] 39 M.R.S.A. § 52. [2] By = in consequence or on the basis of.”
Cummings v. Cummings, 540 A.2d 778 (Me. 1988). “39 M.R.S.A. §§ 52 & 54 (Pamph.1987). Because the compensation award is property acquired after the dissolution of the marriage, the marital presumption does not apply.”
Gordon v. Maine Reduction Co., Inc., 358 A.2d 544 (Me. 1976). “” 39 M.R.S.A. § 52. 2 . We realize that it can be argued somewhat conversely that it is unprofitable to do a complete workup for surgery without some indiea-tin from a nerve block that the surgery can be expected to relieve the symptoms.”
Matthews v. R. T. Allen & Sons, Inc., 266 A.2d 240 (Me. 1970). “39 M.R.S.A. § 52. The Workmen’s Compensation Law represents a relatively recent concept of responsibility without negligence.”
Chaples v. Gilco, Inc., 280 A.2d 546 (Me. 1971). · cites it 2× “The Appellees were not given prior notice of the proposed trip to Boston for this purpose. The Commission concluded: A.”
McAree v. Gerber Prods. Co., 342 A.2d 608 (R.I. 1975). “39 M.R.S.A. §52. In Chaples v. Gilco, Inc.”
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.