You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Carrasco v. Dimeo Construction Co.

Citations: 457 A.2d 265; 1983 R.I. LEXIS 876Docket: No. 82-288-Appeal

Court: Supreme Court of Rhode Island; February 17, 1983; Rhode Island; State Supreme Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The court held a hearing on February 15, 1983, regarding petitioner Daniel Carrasco's appeal against a Workers' Compensation Commission decree that terminated his total disability benefits as of February 11, 1980. After reviewing the arguments and the petitioner's memorandum, the panel concluded that there was no sufficient cause to overturn the Commission's decision. The court found legally competent evidence supporting the Commission's determination that Carrasco's disability had indeed ended on the specified date. Consequently, the appeal was denied and dismissed. Justices Weisberger and Shea did not participate in the decision.

Legal Issues Addressed

Appeal of Workers' Compensation Commission Decision

Application: The court reviews the petitioner's appeal against the Workers' Compensation Commission's decree to determine if there is sufficient cause to overturn the decision.

Reasoning: The court held a hearing on February 15, 1983, regarding petitioner Daniel Carrasco's appeal against a Workers' Compensation Commission decree that terminated his total disability benefits as of February 11, 1980.

Denial of Appeal in Workers' Compensation Cases

Application: The appeal was denied and dismissed due to lack of sufficient cause to overturn the original decision.

Reasoning: After reviewing the arguments and the petitioner's memorandum, the panel concluded that there was no sufficient cause to overturn the Commission's decision. Consequently, the appeal was denied and dismissed.

Evidence Supporting Termination of Disability Benefits

Application: The court found that there was legally competent evidence to support the Commission's determination that the petitioner's disability had ended.

Reasoning: The court found legally competent evidence supporting the Commission's determination that Carrasco's disability had indeed ended on the specified date.