No. 05477794 (1999). EMPLOYEE: Robert F. Bracey.

Case DateMay 20, 1999
CourtMassachusetts
Massachusetts Workers Compensation 1999. No. 05477794 (1999). EMPLOYEE: Robert F. Bracey COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS EMPLOYEE: Robert F. Bracey EMPLOYER: Hogan Regional Center INSURER: Commonwealth of MassachusettsBOARD NO. 05477794REVIEWING BOARD DECISION (Judges McCarthy, Wilson and Smith)APPEARANCES Mitchell J. Wallman, Esq., for the employee Michele C. Lareau, Esq., for the self-insurer and Terrence H. Buckley, Esq., for the self-insurer MCCARTHY, J. Robert Bracey appeals from a decision of an administrative judge denying his claim and assessing § 14(2) penalties against him. Finding no error, we affirm the decision. Mr. Bracey was twenty-eight years of age at the time of the hearing. A graduate of Salem State College, he began working as a mental health counselor for the Massachusetts Department of Mental Health in March 1993. He was assigned to a residential facility as a counselor on the evening shift. He was responsible for direct client care, including overseeing client activities and dinner and assisting them at bedtime. (Dec. 4, 5.) On December 4, 1994, the employee was helping another counselor escort an agitated client up stairs to his room. While climbing the stairs, the client suddenly lashed out with his hand striking the employee and causing him to fall backwards down three or four stairs, breaking a door window with his elbow and landing on the floor. (Dec. 7.) The following day the employee sought treatment at the Salem Hospital where x-rays of the lumbar spine were taken. He was given a prescription for medication and told to rest for five days. (Dec. 7.) Bracey resigned from his job in February 1995 and started a different position with a new employer in June 1995. (Dec. 5.) The employee filed a claim for benefits which the self-insurer denied. In defending the claim, the self-insurer does not dispute that an injury as described by the employee was reported on December 4, 1994 or that he sought medical treatment for his alleged injuries the following day. Rather, the self-insurer asserts that the employee intentionally contrived the accident for the purpose of receiving workers' compensation. (Dec. 7.) Following a § 10A conference denial of his claim, the employee appealed to a hearing de novo. The parties agreed that, as initial liability had not been established, a § 11A...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT