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

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 39, § 58 (2026)

Death benefit; apportionment

✓ 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(REPEALED)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, §6 (RPR). PL 1965, c. 489, §7 (AMD). PL 1971, c. 225, §4 (AMD). PL 1973, c. 543, §3 (AMD). PL 1973, c. 557, §4 (AMD). PL 1975, c. 480, §§8,9 (AMD). PL 1975, c. 493, §3 (AMD). PL 1975, c. 701, §24 (AMD). PL 1975, c. 770, §217 (AMD). PL 1981, c. 483, §3 (AMD). PL 1983, c. 479, §10 (AMD). PL 1985, c. 372, §A24 (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 10 cases, 1971–1981 · leading case: Ladner v. Mason Mitchell Trucking Co., 434 A.2d 37 (Me. 1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Ladner v. Mason Mitchell Trucking Co., 434 A.2d 37 (Me. 1981). · cites it 2× “, the Workers’ Compensation Commission determined that the following were entitled to death benefits (pursuant to 39 M.R.S.A. § 58): (1) Shawn Ladner, the employee’s widow; and (2) Corinna Ladner, Darci Lad-ner, and Bryan Ladner, the employee’s three minor children from the…”
Abshire v. City of Rockland, 388 A.2d 512 (Me. 1978). “Those other than employees are entitled to benefits only in the event of the employee’s death, see 39 M.R.S.A. §§ 58, 60, or where the employee is a minor or is mentally incompetent, see 39 M.”
Campbell v. Bates Fabrics, Inc., 422 A.2d 1014 (Me. 1980). “39 M.R.S.A. § 58 as amended by P.L.1971, ch.”
Connell v. Aetna Life & Cas. Co., 436 A.2d 408 (Me. 1981). “…signed one petition on her own behalf and a petition for each of the two children. 3 . 39 M.R.S.A. § 71 (1978). 4 . 39 M.R.S.A. § 58 (1978).”
Toomey v. City of Portland, 391 A.2d 325 (Me. 1978). “Toomey, filed a petition with the Industrial Accident Commission 1 claiming compensation death benefits under 39 M.R.S.A. § 58. She alleged that her husband’s death resulted from a personal injury he received on November 20,1972 by accident arising out of and in the course of…”
Lavoie v. Int'l Paper Co., 403 A.2d 1186 (Me. 1979). “39 M.R.S.A. §§ 58 and 59 provide for the payment of either a “death benefit” or “burial expenses ” or both, to the family or dependents of the deceased worker, in accordance with the Act’s provisions.”
Stanley v. Petroleum Tank Serv., Inc., 284 A.2d 280 (Me. 1971). “39 M.R.S.A. § 58 established tlie computation formula.”
Maine Bonding & Cas. Co. v. Mahoney, 392 A.2d 16 (Me. 1978). “39 M.R.S.A. § 58. An “employee,” by definition, includes such dependents as are entitled to payment of compensation.”
Costa v. Foodliner, 431 A.2d 1292 (Me. 1981). “Following John Costa’s death in June 1979, his widow filed a petition for death benefits and burial expenses pursuant to 39 M.R.S.A. §§ 58 and 59. On October 7, 1980, the Commission denied all the pending petitions, concluding: John Costa, Sr.”
Weeks v. State, 389 A.2d 325 (Me. 1978). “This is an appeal by a claimant of workmen’s compensation death benefits under 39 M.R.S.A. § 58 from a judgment entered pro forma in the Superior Court on a Decree of the Industrial Accident Commission.”
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.