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

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 39-A, § 101 (2026)

Short title

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
This Part may be known and cited and referred to in proceedings and agreements under this Part as the "Maine Workers' Compensation Act of 1992."   [PL 1991, c. 885, Pt. A, §8 (NEW); PL 1991, c. 885, Pt. A, §§9-11 (AFF).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1991, c. 885, §A8 (NEW). 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 (1 in the last 5 years), 1994–2022 · leading case: Combined Mgmt., Inc. v. Superintendent of the Bureau of Ins. of the State of Maine, 22 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 1994).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Combined Mgmt., Inc. v. Superintendent of the Bureau of Ins. of the State of Maine, 22 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 1994). · cites it 2× “39-A M.R.S.A. § 101 et seq. CMI claimed that because CMI provides workers’ compensation benefits through a welfare benefit plan that is covered by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), the Superintendent’s efforts to apply the workers’ compensation law to CMI…”
Doucette v. Hallsmith/Sysco Food Servs., Inc., 2011 ME 68 (Me. 2011). · cites it 2× “3, § 2(2)(A) provides: Except as specifically provided in 39-A M.R.S.A. § 101 et seq. or in these rules, forms and correspondence required to be filed in the Central Office of the Workers' Compensation Board are filed when the Board receives the form by mail, in-hand delivery,…”
Bureau v. Staffing Network, Inc., 678 A.2d 583 (Me. 1996). “At issue in this consolidated appeal 1 is the continued existence of the so-called “work search” requirement in determining injured workers’ entitlement to benefits for partial incapacity pursuant to the Maine Workers’ Compensation Act of 1992, 39-A M.R.S.A. § 101 et seg.…”
Frank v. L.L. Bean, Inc., 352 F. Supp. 2d 8 (D. Me. 2005). “Defendant has moved to dismiss Counts III, IV and VI under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on the grounds that Defendant is exempt from liability for common law torts under the Maine Workers’ Compensation Act, 39-A M.R.S.A § 101…”
Hartford Enter., Inc. v. Coty, 529 F. Supp. 2d 95 (D. Me. 2008). “Those employers must either obtain a workers’ compensation policy from an approved insurance company or obtain approval of a program of self-insurance.”
Breton v. Travelers Ins., 147 F.3d 58 (1st Cir. 1998). “In August 1997, Richard Breton filed an amended complaint, under diversity jurisdic *59 tion, against The Travelers Insurance Company (“Travelers”), alleging that Travelers had intentionally and tortiously mishandled his claim for workers’ compensation benefits due him under the…”
Wood v. United States, 115 F. Supp. 2d 9 (D. Me. 2000). “Maine Workers Compensation Act (“MWCA”) If the Court does not find this case is barred by one of the above discussed exceptions to the FTCA, the Defendant alternatively argues that Wood’s claims are barred by Maine’s Workers’ Compensation Act (“MWCA”), 39-A M.R.S.A. § 101 et…”
Degen-hogan v. Bourdon, 324 F. Supp. 2d 50 (D. Me. 2004). “Under 39-A M.R.S.A. § 101(12), if an employer is insured, the term, "employer,” includes "the insurer, self-insurer or group self-insurer, unless the contrary intent is apparent from the context or is inconsistent with the purposes of the Act.”
E. All. Ins. Co. v. Harold Haines, Inc. (Me. Super. Ct 2022). “39-A M.R.S. §101, et. seq. Nearly a year after the incident, both Joel and his parents were made aware of Eastern Alliance's intention to attempt to enforce liability for Joel's injury against a third party.”
Cloutier-Hennigar v. Maine Workers' Comp. Bd. (Me. Super. Ct 2003). “§§ 1 - 195 (now 39-A M.R.S.A. § 101 — 909) (the Act). Pursuant to a 1989 decree, Petitioner was awarded partial (15%) disability.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 39-A, § 101(12) — 1 case
Degen-hogan v. Bourdon, 324 F. Supp. 2d 50 (D. Me. 2004). “Under 39-A M.R.S.A. § 101(12), if an employer is insured, the term, "employer,” includes "the insurer, self-insurer or group self-insurer, unless the contrary intent is apparent from the context or is inconsistent with the purposes of the Act.”
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.