Lemoine v. Coby Glass Products Co.

4 Citing cases

  1. Savaria v. DiSano

    118 R.I. 357 (R.I. 1977)   Cited 8 times
    In Savaria v. DiSano, R.I., 373 A.2d 820 (1977), an injured employee sought workmen's compensation benefits for an electric wheelchair and an elevator.

    Accordingly, it denied relief. In essence, the commission equated the relief sought in this case with that requested by the employee in Lemoine v. Coby Glass Prod. Co., 115 R.I. 86, 341 A.2d 40 (1975), who sought reimbursement for a wig purchased to cover a bald spot that resulted from a compensable injury, and by the worker in Tirocchi v. United States Rubber Co., 101 R.I. 429, 224 A.2d 387 (1966), whose hands had been so seriously injured in an industrial accident that she required the services of a housekeeper to perform the chores she had previously done herself but was no longer able to do. In the Tirocchi and Lemoine cases, the particular benefits sought would undoubtedly have relieved the injured employees from the effects of their injuries.

  2. Fallon v. Skin Medicine Surgery Centers

    713 A.2d 777 (R.I. 1998)   Cited 3 times

    It is significant to note that the statute specifically omits any reference to an employee's original petition that is only partially successful as permitting an award for counsel fees. In fact this Court in Lemoine v. Coby Glass Products Co., 115 R.I. 86, 341 A.2d 40 (1975), specifically noted that § 28-35-32 "clearly provides that attorney's fees may be awarded only if an employee has achieved either complete success in prosecuting certain specified claims or partial success in defending against an employer's petition for review.

  3. Stone v. State

    510 A.2d 961 (R.I. 1986)

    The facts unequivocally illustrate that the employee was not successful in the case at bar since the appellate commission denied and dismissed his petition for review. The employee is therefore not entitled to a counsel-fee award under § 28-35-32.Lemoine v. Coby Glass Products Co., 115 R.I. 86, 89, 341 A.2d 40, 42 (1975), and Peloquin v. ITT General Controls, Inc., 104 R.I. 257, 265, 243 A.2d 754, 758 (1968). As a result, the appellate commission did not err in failing to award the employee a counsel fee.

  4. Natale v. Frito-Lay, Inc.

    119 R.I. 713 (R.I. 1978)   Cited 3 times

    Section 28-35-32 clearly differentiates between the two situations and does not permit recovery of costs where the employee had initiated the proceedings and failed to be wholly successful. See Lemoine v. Coby Glass Prods. Co., 115 R.I. 86, 341 A.2d 40 (1975). Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to recover the transcript fee, and the commission did not err in failing to award the cost of the transcript.