No compensation shall be allowed for the injury or death of an employee occasioned
by his or her willful intention to bring about the injury or death of himself or herself
or another, where it is proved that his or her injury or death was occasioned by that
conduct, or that the injury or death resulted from his or her intoxication or unlawful
use of controlled substances as defined in chapter 28 of title 21.
Notes of Decisions
Beauchesne v. David London & Co., 375 A.2d 920 (R.I. 1977).
· cites it 3× “1956 (1968 Reenactment) §28-33-2 precludes ■him from recovery. The statute provides that “[n]o compensation shall be allowed for the injury * * * of an employee where it is proved that his injury * * resulted from his intoxication while on duty.”
Deignan v. Cowan Plastic Prods. Corp., 206 A.2d 534 (R.I. 1965).
“*196 Looking to our own workmen’s compensation act, it is obvious that if the legislature had deemed it expedient to deny the benefits of additional compensation to such a minor, it could have done so specifically in the same manner that in §28-33-2 it denied all compensation…”
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.