Enjoy what you do for a living – a goal a lot people are unable to attain. Many people may look at the legal profession as one with a lot of stressed, overworked, and tired individuals that can’t possibly be happy. While those things may be true for a lot of attorneys, I don’t think that serves as a mutual exclusion to happiness. In fact, I have found some of those most taxed are in fact blissful underneath it all.

“The secret of change is to focus all of your energy, not on fighting the old, but on building the new.” Socrates

While it may be difficult to know if in fact Socrates actually wrote those exact words, the concept they encompass certainly seems reasonable, if not inspired. Why spend so much time worrying about and focusing on the past, when you could, instead, find ways to move forward and make the best of a situation? Trying to change the past is like trying to fix a flat tire by rolling the car backwards to get off that nail…it just doesn’t work! The better solution is to get out the jack, get out the spare, and change the tire! Or find someone to help fix it. In short, focus on finding a solution to the problem at hand, rather than exhausting yourself trying to undo what can’t be undone.

“There’s no place like home, there’s no place like home.” Dorothy

In 2010, after practicing law in the Great State of Maine for 18 years, I had the brilliant notion of ditching my secure little life in Portland, selling everything I owned, with the exception of the few precious items that would fit in my trusty Subaru, quitting my profession, and heading off to live over the rainbow in the Southern California. For all intents and purposes, this was not such a bad idea. What it did, besides keep me warm and snow-free for a full five years, was to give me some much needed perspective. What did I confirm? Two things: 1) Change is almost always good; 2) There’s truly no place like home…especially when home is Maine.

A Hearing Officer from the Maine Workers’ Compensation Board issued what is sure to be the first in a long line of decisions relating to the compensability of medical marijuana. In the case of Crandall v. University of Maine System, Hearing Officer Elizabeth Elwin applied DOJ guidelines  to determine whether, by paying for medical marijuana, the employer and insurer could be subject to criminal prosecution and ultimately ordered them to pay for Mr. Crandall’s medical marijuana.

After determining that Mr. Crandall’s medical marijuana use was having a positive impact on his shoulder injury management, the hearing officer reviewed a list of “enforcement priorities” issued to federal prosecutors by the Department of Justice to assess the whether or not the DOJ was likely to prosecute an insurer for, in effect, buying marijuana. Elwin pointed out that the DOJ has determined that unless the conduct in question implicates one or more of these “priorities”, it is not worth their resources to pursue prosecution, especially when it comes to seriously ill individuals and their caregivers.

The DOJ’s priorities include the prevention of distribution to minors, diversion of marijuana from a state where it is legal to where it is not, violence in cultivation and distribution, and drugged driving. The Hearing Officer ultimately found that none of the priorities were implicated in the case and the employer/insurer was unlikely to be prosecuted for issuing payment.

It is virtually guaranteed that this case will make its way to the Board’s Appellate Division, and very possibly the Supreme Judicial Court. In the meantime, other hearing officers and parties across the state have a well thought out decision from which to compare their cases. You can read the full decision here. 

Recently the Maine Law Court upheld an award of death benefits to the estate of a Salvation Army portfolio manager who died from a heart attack while walking on a treadmill in his home office.   He was found dead on a work day near a running treadmill, with a TV tuned to a financial news channel and his work-issued smartphone nearby.

In a pair of recent decisions, the Appellate Division of the Maine Workers’ Compensation Board has significantly restricted the availability of the “subsequent nonwork-related injury” defense to workers’ compensation claims. For the first time, Maine employees who are out of work for non work-related injuries or diseases sustained may be entitled to lost time benefits simply by soliciting after-the-fact medical restrictions from doctors hired by their attorneys.

Spring is finally here in Maine. After a long and snowy winter, many are ready to spend as much time as possible outdoors. Employers too are welcoming the season. Many are organizing company athletic teams and sporting events, in sports ranging from softball and golf to ultimate frisbee.

Some employers worry that by holding sporting events, they could be exposing themselves to liability under the Workers’ Compensation Act. Fortunately, that is not necessarily the case. The Workers’ Compensation Act specifically excludes voluntary participants in employer-sponsored athletic events from the definition of “employee.” That means that employers can organize voluntary sporting events without excessive worry about risking a costly workers’ compensation claim.

So, from all of us here at Tucker Law Group, play ball!

Last week the Maine Workers’ Compensation Board Appellate Division issued a decision that should serve to remind Maine employers of the importance of documenting personnel files whenever accommodating an injured employee in a light duty position.