Narrative Opinion Summary
The case involves two consolidated legal matters arising from a workplace injury in 1968. In the first case, the employee's children filed claims for loss of parental society in 1983, which were dismissed based on the precedent that such claims are barred if the spouse's claim for loss of consortium is time-barred, as was the case here. The second case concerns the employee's insurer suing a third party, Atlantic Research Corporation, for negligence. This led to a settlement approved by a Superior Court judge, awarding the insurer $60,000, less than what was paid to the employee. The employee’s wife appealed, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction to approve the settlement, asserting that the Industrial Accident Board should have had the authority under G. L. c. 152, 15. The court agreed, finding that the settlement was not made during a 'trial' as required by statute, thus necessitating Board approval. Consequently, the judgment in case No. 83-691 was vacated, and proceedings were stayed pending Board action, while the dismissal of case No. 83-1328 was affirmed.
Legal Issues Addressed
Jurisdiction of the Industrial Accident Board in Settlement Approvalsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court held that the Industrial Accident Board, not the Superior Court, had jurisdiction to approve settlements involving third-party claims related to worker's compensation.
Reasoning: The court agrees that the judge should have allowed the Board to apply its expertise to the statutory framework.
Loss of Parental Society Claims and Statute of Limitationssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Children's claims for loss of parental society are barred if the spouse's claim for loss of consortium is time-barred under the statute of limitations.
Reasoning: This precedent established that if a spouse's claim for loss of consortium is barred by the statute of limitations, subsequent claims by children for loss of parental society arising from the same incident are also barred.
Requirement for Settlement Approval by Industrial Accident Boardsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Settlements reached before a factual examination in a trial do not meet statutory criteria for approval by a judge instead of the Board.
Reasoning: The court finds that the settlement in question was not made 'during a trial,' as it occurred prior to any examination of the facts, and thus did not meet the statutory criteria for approval by the judge instead of the Board.