• Susan Abele v. Newton Retirement Board, CR-08-495 (DALA, 2009)

    Susan D. Abele is properly classified in Category Three pursuant to the Newton Retirement Board’s June 1, 1987 creditable service supplementary regulation because Ms. Abele worked both full-time and part-time during her employment with the City, even where the full-time work lasted only five months.
  • DPH v. Aiguobarueghian Remand Decision, PHNA-06-623 (DALA, 2009)

    I conclude that the Respondent’s conduct does not fall within the exception to the definition of abuse as outlined in 105 CMR 155.003(c). Specifically, I conclude that there was no necessity to restrain Resident #1 on the day in question.
  • Department of Public Health v. Rashid Amin, PH-08-487 (DALA, 2008)

    Petitioner performed undercover compliance buys on four visits to Country Farms in March and April 2008, and found two different Class II violations of the WIC Vendor Agreement that trigger a mandatory three year disqualification from participation in the WIC Program. A Class IV violation was found on two of the visits with 20 sanction points imposed. Respondent questioned the reliability of the procedures involved in the compliance buys and claimed that at all times proper WIC check transactions were followed by the clerks during the transactions. This defense was found to be insufficient, and Petitioner's evidence is sufficient proof to support the two Class II and two Class IV violations of the WIC Vendor Agreement.
  • Senethra Anderson v. Dept. Veteran Services (DALA, 2009)

    Because the petitioner’s pro se representation generates no income for her and is not expected to do so, it is not “employment” for purposes of establishing her eligibility for M.G.L. c. 115 veterans benefits; accordingly, the decision of the Massachusetts Department of Veterans Services sustaining the suspension of petitioner’s veterans benefits based upon her refusal to accept any kind of employment is affirmed, without prejudice to a reapplication by the petitioner for M.G.L. c.115 benefits that meets the employment-related requirements of 108 CMR 7.01 and 7.02.
  • Andrew Antonucci v. Arlington Retirement Board, CR-06-603 (DALA, 2009)

    This application for accidental disability retirement benefits is denied because the Petitioner has not demonstrated that he was unable to perform the essential duties of his job on his last day of work. Vest v. CRAB, 41 Mass. App. Ct. 191 (1996). After retirement for superannuation, the Petitioner lived an active lifestyle until several years later when he developed atrial fibrillation.
  • William Barry v. State Board of Retirement, CR-07-1125 (DALA, 2009)

    Human Service Coordinator-C was properly classified in Group 1 pursuant to G.L. c. 32, § 3(2)(g), and is not entitled to Group 2 classification, because his regular and major duties are administrative and supervisory in nature. Occasional contact with mentally ill or mentally defective clients and exposure to occasional danger do not entitle Petitioner to Group 2 classification.
  • Louis Bona v. OAG, LB-08-278 (DALA, 2009)

    A Connecticut electrical company was cited for failing to pay its employees the prevailing wage and taking impermissible deductions for vacation. Decision upholds the prevailing wage portion of the citation but vacates the vacation portion because the program is voluntary and the employees get all of their money back each year. The civil penalty is reduced from $10,000 to $2,000.
  • Ellen Brannelly v. Teachers' Retirement System, CR-08-753 (DALA, 2009)

    Petitioner is an active member of the Teachers' Retirement System. She is not eligible under G.L. c. 32, s 3(5) to purchase for creditable service her prior work-study employment while a Boston College student, because she was paid by Boston College, a non-profit private university that is not a governmental unit of the Commonwealth. Petitioner argued but did not prove that she was paid out of public funds. She did not prove that she was directly supervised by employees of a governmental unit.
  • Wendy Cahoon v. Barnstable County Retirement Board, CR-08-663 (DALA, 2009)

    The Petitioner, who had minimal training for the position of municipal Treasurer/Collector, and, who was under varying degrees of stress throughout her tenure in office, did not meet her burden of proving that she sustained a personal injury with the purview of G..L. c. 32, s 7(1) or G.L. c. 152.
  • Bonadie & Extreme Cleaningv. OAG, LB-09-163 (DALA, 2009)

    This appeal is dismissed for lack of prosecution after Petitioner failed to appear at the pre-hearing conference and later, at the hearing. Reasons for the failure to appear at the hearing are insufficient to excuse the absence.
  • Albert Bouchard v. Teachers' Retirement system, CR-06-1067 (DALA, 2010)

    During the summer months in the years 1965 through 1968, the Petitioner was a student worker and not a regular employee of the Bristol County Agricultural School. He is not eligible to purchase this prior part-time non-membership service either under the provisions of G.L. c. 32, § 3(5) or § 4(2). The decision of the Respondent denying him creditable service for that period of time is affirmed.
  • Paul Burek v. Montague Retirement Board, CR-08-258 (DALA, 2009)

    The respondent Board of Retirement correctly denied the petitioner’s application for accidental disability retirement. The petitioner failed to show that a job-related event or condition was the natural and proximate cause of his injury. The petitioner, nonetheless, did not engage in serious and willful misconduct by driving even though he had a history of seizures.
  • Louis Calabrese v. Hampden County Regional Retirement Board, CR-08-329 (DALA, 2010)

    Elected official who joined Retirement System within ninety days of assuming his fifth term in office, pursuant to G.L. c. 32, § 3(2)(a)(vi), and retired six months after joining not precluded from receiving a superannuation retirement allowance by G.L. c. 32, § 3(6)(e) two-year active service requirement.
  • Rita Capece v. State Board of Retirement, CR-07-586 (DALA, 2010)

    Petitioner is not entitled to change her deceased husband’s retirement option selection after his retirement and death. She had signed the spousal acknowledgement on the option selection form showing selection of Option B. No evidence showed the deceased husband was mentally impaired at the time he made his election, and her testimony that she believed the form she signed was a disability form is irrelevant in the absence of any fraud or misrepresentation on the part of the Respondent. Even if the option selection was invalid for some reason, the result would not have been changed, as the default selection is Option B in the absence of a valid election.
  • Kenneth Cardone v. Teachers' Retirement System, CR-07-611 (DALA, 2009)

    The Teachers' Retirement System properly excluded the increases received by the Petitioner during the 2004-2005 and 2005-2006 school years in excess of the 4% increases that he had consistently received in previous years as regular compensation in the calculation of his superannuation retirement benefit. The Teachers' Retirement System determined that the excess increases were awarded on the basis of Mr. Cardone's announced plans to retire effective June 30, 2006.
  • BRM v. Dr. Adam Cerel, RM-07-376 (DALA, 2009)

    that the Conclusions of Law set forth in the Stipulation are warranted and I hereby adopt them.Based on the foregoing, I recommend that the Board imposed such discipline onDr. Cerel as it deems appropriate in light of the facts and conclusions of law stipulated by the parties.
  • Bruce Challinor v. Teachers' Retirement System, CR-08-402 (DALA, 2009)

    Petitioner who wished to purchase his prior vocational service failed to rebut the presumption that the Invoice and accompanying letter were sent to him in February 2007. He is no longer able to purchase that service.
  • BRM v. Dr. Neena Chaturvedi, RM-06-38 (DALA, 2009)

    It is clear on the entire record that Dr. Chaturvedi failed to adequately manage the growth in her practice and that attempts to modernize administrative systems may have created more problems than they solved. Also clear is that there are mitigating circumstances. Moreover, it appears, with the Board's guidance, Dr. Chaturvedi's management of records and patients was improving. In all this, I found no evidence that any patient's health was put in jeopardy by Dr. Chaturvedi's conduct. Based on the foregoing, I recommend that the Board take such action as is consistent with the foregoing rulings.
  • Joseph Clancy v. Bristol Retirement Board, CR-08-321(DALA, 2009)

    Building Inspector in Town of Norton applied for accidental disability retirement on the basis of an injury he sustained when he climbed over a full length counter/ barrier in order to reenter his office from an outside door, an injury not sustained while in the performance of his duties. Eighteen months later, in December 2006, he reinjured his back while getting out of a chair, a common movement which is not compensable under Section 7. The Petitioner continued to work on light duty after the December 2006 injury until he was placed on administrative leave on December 12, 2006. He was provided with a lawful reasonable accommodation.
  • DPH v. Cloverdale Farms, PH-08-338 (DALA, 2009)

    Because the Department of Public Health has established a pattern of overcharging by Cloverdale Farms, Inc., the store, its owner, Ishtiaq Naqvi, and its manager, Zahid Mahmood, are disqualified from participating in the WIC program for three years.
  • Christopher Coleman v. OAG, LB-08-717 (DALA, 2009)

    Appeal challenging civil penalties assessed for failure to pay prevailing wages and submit certified payroll records, in violation of M.G.L. c. 149, §§ 27 and 27B, respectively, is dismissed for mootness following payment pursuant to settlement.
  • BRM v. Dr. Joseph Conway, RM-08-29 (DALA, 2009)

    Physician who did not have malpractice insurance coverage for certain stretches of time violated a regulation of the Board of Registration in Medicine (BRM)and is subject to discipline by said board
  • EEC v. Raymonde Comeau, OC-08-288 (DALA, 2009)

    The Department of Early Education and Care (EEC) issued an emergency suspension to Respondent, family child care licensee, for the following violations: failing to provide direct supervision of the children in her care; leaving an unapproved and unqualified person who had not had a required background check in charge of the children; failing to inform EEC of a new person in the household; failing to keep the outdoor space free of hazards; and, failing to maintain accurate child care records. Respondent also had a "51B" report issued against her regarding a child in her family child care program. Sufficient evidence is found to justify the imposition of the emergency suspension under G.L. c. 28A, d 102 MCR 1.07(5) based on a bundle of conditions and circumstances that existed around the time period of April 8 - 16, 2008.
  • James Cooley and Contract Floor v. OAG, LB-08-503, 504 (DALA, 2009)

    There is no jurisdiction to hold a hearing because the appeal of the two citations was not timely made. Respondent's Motion to Dismiss for this reason is allowed. Petitioner, the sole owner and proprietor of a business that worked on a public construction project at a library, was issued citations by OAG-FLD for failing to pay the prevailing wage to one of his workers on this project, for failing to maintain payroll records on the project, and for failing to make these records available for inspection by OAG-FLD. The record shows Petitioner was able, before the citations were issued, to communicate about the issues raised in the citations with OAG-FLD through telephone conversations. The record shows he received the citations. His claim of having been in poor health with cancer does not excuse his untimely filed appeals.
  • Cox & Grimes v. Boston Retirement Bd. and Teresa Carter Remand CR-07-1017 (DALA, 2009)

    After decision was issued in case submitted on the documents under 801 CMR 1.01(10)(c) at the request of the Petitioners, the Petitioners requested a hearing.
  • Cremins v. State Board of Retirement , CR-08-627 (DALA 2009)

    The petitioner, a campus police officer, is not entitled to be classified in Group 2 or Group 4 for retirement purposes.
  • Cremins v. State Board of Retirement, CR-08-619 (DALA 2009)

    The petitioner may purchase his contract service as creditable service because he has more than ten years of creditable service with the State Employees Retirement System. The State Board of Retirement erred when it determined that his past military service could not be included as creditable service in order to satisfy the ten year service requirement under G.L. c. 32, s. 4 (1) (s).
  • Jon Cremins v. State Board of Retirement Remand Decision, CR-08-619 (DALA, 2009)

    The petitioner may purchase his contract service as creditable service because he has more than ten years of creditable service with the State Employees Retirement System. The State Board of Retirement erred when it determined that his past military service could not be included as creditable service in order to satisfy the ten year service requirement under G.L. c. 32, § 4 (1) (s).
  • Mark Crosbie v. State Board of Retirement, CR-08-319 (DALA, 2009)

    Mark B. Crosbie is properly classified in Group 1, rather than Group 2, pursuant to G.L. c. 32, § 3(2)(g), because his regular and major duties do not require him to have the care, custody, instruction or other supervision of prisoners
  • Department of Public Health v. Jessica Currao, PHNA-08-433 (DALA, 2009)

    ppeal by respondent Jessica Currao from a finding by the Department of Public Health that she misappropriated patient property from a nursing home resident. Following respondent’s failure to appear for a scheduled status conference or respond to an order to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed, the appeal is dismissed for lack of prosecution and the appealed finding is made final.
  • Department of Public Health v. Deli Market, PH-07-539 (DALA, 2008)

    The DPH has met its burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the statutory and regulatory Class IV violations set forth in the April 9, 2008 Notice of Termination of the WIC Vendor Agreement and Disqualification From the WIC Program took place on February 11, February 26 and April 2, 2008.
  • Geraldo DeOliveira v. OAG, LB-08-396 (DALA, 2009)

    An appeal challenging a $3,000 civil penalty assessed in a citation issued by the Attorney General’s Fair Labor Division for failure to furnish records regarding wage payments, in violation of M.G.L. c. 151, § 19(3), is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because it was not filed within the ten-day appeal period prescribed by M.G.L. c. 149, § 27C(b)(4). That the petitioners lacked counsel to assist them in recognizing grounds for appealing the penalty until the appeal period had run was a matter of personal choice rather than the result of defective appeal rights notice in the Fair Labor Division’s citation, and therefore did not toll the appeal period. The petitioners’ challenge to the constitutionality of the statutory ten-day appeal period is noted as having been raised and, with the operative dates and absence of circumstances tolling the appeal period established, the claim is preserved for review by the Superior Court if the petitioners seek it.
  • Department of Public Health v. Paula DePina, PHNA-08-815 (DALA, 2009)

    A home health aide working for a home health agency inside her client’s home, misappropriated money and credit cards. She had formed an intent to take at least a $20 bill from the cash and credit cards when the client’s daughter entered the room she was in. She then tried to hide the money clip and credit cards from the daughter by throwing her jacket over her hand that had these items in it, and then trying to walk away from the daughter. The fact that the daughter moved aside the jacket hiding the cash and credit cards before the homemaker could leave with them does not overcome the violation of 105 CMR 155.003 for misappropriation of a client’s property, which includes a temporary misappropriation. The Homemaker’s defense that she was only considering taking $20 was not credible. The Dept. of Public Health has shown sufficient proof to place the homemaker’s name on the Nurse’s Aide Registry
  • DPH v. Amie Desmarais, PHNA-08-609 (DALA, 2009)

    Department of Public Health has proven that Certified Nurse Aide committed one act of patient abuse against nursing home resident when she used callous and foul language toward him that resulted in his being upset and crying.
  • Marian Desrosiers v. State Board of Retirement, CR-07-112 (DALA, 2009)

    The Petitioner is not entitled to full-time creditable service for her part-time service rendered in Kennewick, Washington during the 1982-1983 school year as a high school social studies teacher. The holding in the case of Madden v. CRAB, 431 Mass. 607 (2000) is not applicable as Ms. Desrosiers’s service in Kennewick, Washington was non-membership service
  • Josephine DiChiara v. Essex Regional Retirement Board, CR-07-622 (DALA, 2009)

    The Petitioner, who was injured in a fall while walking across the school parking lot into the school building on her way to work in the morning, was not injured "in the performance of her duties."
  • Nancy Diede v. State Board of Retirement, CR-07-519 (DALA, 2009)

    Mental Retardation Worker I, who was kicked during night shift by violent client and sustained back and neck injuries, is entitled to new medical panel. The first medical panel lacked correct job description and pertinent medical MRI studies.
  • Robert Dunham v. PERAC, CR-07-1143 (DALA, 2009)

    This application for accidental disability retirement benefits is denied because the presumption raised under G. L. c. 32, s. 94 has been successfully rebutted by competent evidence, and the Petitioner has failed to meet his burden of proof with respect to causation under G. L. c. 32, s. 7(1).
  • Daniel Dunn v. OAG, LB-08-415 (DALA, 2009)

    Appeal by petitioners Daniel Dunn and Bayview Development, LLC from two citations issued to them by the Attorney General’s Fair Labor Division, one for unintentional failure to pay wages to a former Bayview employee during the period January 3, 2007 to May 9, 2007, in violation of M.G.L. c. 149, § 148 (ordering payment of $5,720, consisting of $4,820 in restitution for unpaid wages and vacation time and a $900 civil penalty), and the other for intentional failure to furnish employment records for inspection, in violation of M.G.L. c. 151, § 19(3) (ordering payment of a $200 civil penalty). Following a hearing, the total amount that the petitioners were ordered to pay by the two citations is reduced from $5,920 to $4,505.78, based upon the following adjustments:
  • Henry Dupuis and Henry's Roofing v. OAG, LB-08-65 (DALA, 2009)

    Because the evidence is insufficient to show any particular level of unpaid wages, I have no basis on which to modify the citation. Accordingly, I conclude that the citation cannot be modified and must therefore be vacated.
  • Kurt Espinola v. Bristol County Retirement Board, CR-08-644 (DALA, 2009)

    The three months and twenty-nine days of creditable service that the Petitioner received for the period that he received workers' compensation payments shall not be counted as "services" for the purposes of determining his eligibility for a retirement allowance pursuant to G.L. c. 32, s 28N, based upon the clear language of the statute, the definitions of "creditable service" and "service" in G.L. c. 32, s 1, and the consistent treatment of s 28N in prior DALA, CRAB and Superior Court decisions.
  • Walter Fender v. Plymouth County Retirement Board Remand, CR-08-736 (DALA, 2010)

    The two deaths and one suicide attempt in the Petitioner’s department do not constitute personal injuries because the events did not occur while the Petitioner was in the performance of his duties and the Petitioner did not witness the events. When considered as part of the series of events claimed by the Petitioner, none of which constitutes a personal injury, the series of events does not become a personal injury. Furthermore, the medical panel did not certify that the deaths and suicide attempt were causative of the Petitioner’s disability.
  • Elaine Nan-Geller v. Teachers' Retirement Board, CR-05-1273 (DALA, 2009)

    Respondent’s decision denying a former public school teacher’s application for a termination retirement allowance pursuant to M.G.L. c. 32, § 10(2) is reversed. The teacher, who met the age and creditable service requirements of the statute, demonstrated that she was removed or discharged from her teaching position, without moral turpitude on her part, on grounds for terminating a teacher with professional teaching status that are specified by M.G.L. c. 71, § 42, and there is no evidence that her dismissal or removal was “for violation of the laws, rules and regulations applicable to [her] office or position” or was brought about by “collusion or conspiracy,” see M.G.L. c. 32, § 10(2)(c).
  • James Geller v. Teachers' Retirement System, CR-07-616 (DALA, 2009)

    Beverly public school teacher who was dismissed in 1996 was not eligible to purchase creditable service for out-of-state public teaching, where he filed two separate applications to purchase creditable service in 2001 and then again in 2007, because he was not a member in service on either occasion.
  • Elizabeth Goodall v. Worcester Retirement Board, CR-07-394 (DALA, 2009)

    The Petitioner, a van driver of children with developmental disabilities, has proven that she is entitled to accidental disability retirement benefits after sustaining a disabling shoulder injury during repetitive pulling of a defective door in order to open and shut it over the course of an entire work day. The Petitioner has also successfully proven that the accommodations offered by the employer were not reasonable in her case.
  • Sarah Hague v. Teachers' Retirement System, CR-06-694 (DALA, 2009)

    The Teachers’ Retirement System correctly calculated the Petitioner’s retirement date. The Petitioner’s last day of service as a teacher in Fall River was June 30, 2006.The Teachers’ Retirement System did not receive her retirement application until September 11, 2006. Accordingly, her correct date of retirement is September 26, 2006 and not July 1, 2006.
  • Elizabeth Hanchett v. State Board of Retirement, CR-07-659 (DALA, 2010)

    Petitioner is not entitled to a Group 2 job classification upon retirement from her job at Western Massachusetts Hospital as a nursing assistant I rendering direct patient care primarily in a unit with patients who have intermediate, end of life, and respite care needs. Even with as many as four or five Alzheimer’s patients and possibly some mentally retarded respite care patients out of the nineteen total patients in her unit, she has not proven that her regular and major duties are providing direct care to predominately mentally ill or mentally defective persons as required for a Group 2 job classification. The decision of the respondent giving her a Group 1 job classification is affirmed.
  • Harbor Access Group Recommended Final Decision, DEP-07-671 (DALA, 2009)

    In a determination of applicability, the Department of Environmental Protection declared that a granite seawall and a concrete walkway on land owned by Stone-Ashe Realty Trust lie seaward of the historic high water mark. After a hearing, I find that the structures are landward of the historic high water mark. Consequently, I order DEP to issue a final determination that the seawall and walkway lie landward of the historic high water and are, thus, not subject to 310 CMR 9.35(3)(A)(2)b, which requires public access over filled tidelands.
  • BRM v. Dr. Bruce Hookway, RM-09-591 (DALA, 2010)

    Physician who was disciplined in Rhode Island for pattern of prescribing controlled substances to patients in a manner that does not meet medical practice standard is subject to discipline by the Board.
  • Owen Ingram v. State Board of Retirement, CR-07-584 (DALA, 2010)

    This case is remanded to the medical panel to consider the aggravation theory of causation where the panel failed to consider whether the Petitioner’s work-related injury might have aggravated his pre-existing cervical arthritis to the point of total and permanent disability.
  • DPH v. Kwike Market,PH-08-714 (DALA, 2009)

    The Respondents, a WIC approved vendor, store owner, and manager violated the WIC Agreement and state and federal laws and regulations by overcharging and check typing on four separate occasions. In addition, the Respondents failed to post prices on all items and substituted unauthorized food products for authorized WIC products. The Respondents are disqualified from participation in the WIC Program for three years.
  • Michael Jiles v. OAG, LB-08-437 (DALA 2009)

    An appeal challenging a citation issued by the Attorney General’s Fair Labor Division, ordering the petitioners to pay $2,272.50 in restitution and a $1,000 civil penalty for their unintentional failure to make timely wage payments to four employees, in violation of M.G.L. c. 149, § 148, is dismissed for lack of prosecution, because the petitioners did not appear at the prehearing conference or respond to a subsequent order to show cause, and the citation is affirmed.
  • Margaret Kelliher v. Teachers' Retirement System, CR-08-112 (DALA, 2009)

    The Petitioner is entitled to have the $2,500 of the $4,000 stipend she received for serving as Exemplary Director during the 2007-2008 school year included as regular compensation in the calculation of her superannuation retirement benefit as that stipend is included in the relevant Collective Bargaining Agreement.
  • BRM v. Dr. Vernon Kellogg, RM-07-706(DALA, 2010)

    I conclude that petitioner has proven that respondent violated pertinent statutes, rules and regulations, and that petitioner acted according to its statutory and regulatory authority in taking the actions it has against respondent. Respondent failed to reveal to petitioner on his license renewal forms that he no longer held certification in emergency medicine, that he had stopped his malpractice insurance policy, and that he had been investigated twice by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Respondent also altered his expired malpractice insurance declarations to show he held the insurance, failed to provide his home patients’ medical records to petitioner upon being subpoenaed to produce them, and did not follow petitioner’s prescribing guidelines concerning immediate care needs of a patient when he dispensed generic Vicodin in large amounts to some of his home patients.
  • BRM v. Dr. James Kelly, RM-08-268 (DALA, 2009)

    Petitioner's Motion to Default is granted
  • Julianne Kinsman v. State Board of Retirement, CR-07-470 (DALA, 2010)

    Petitioner, a current member of respondent retirement system with at least ten years of creditable service, seeks creditable service through G.L. c. 32, § 4(1)(s) for immediately prior non-membership part-time service as an instructor at the same community college where she now works full-time as a professor-instructor. She had been hired to work one-fourth the course load of a full-time instructor one semester at a time, and worked six consecutive semesters, 1980-1983. This is the equivalent of working three academic years as no work is done by full-time professors for more than two semesters a year. Respondent prorated her creditable service but erroneously used a twelve month calendar year and not the nine month academic year that pertained to her work. Case is remanded to make this correction to the calculation. Because this was non-membership prior service, she cannot receive three full years of creditable service.
  • Steven LaFleur v OAG, LB-08-686 (DALA, 2009)

    The Fair Labor Division issued a subcontractor on a public works construction project a citation, including a $5,500.00 penalty, for failing to provide payroll reports to the awarding authority each week. After a hearing, I determine that when the Fair Labor Division set the penalty amount, it failed to consider four of the five statutorily-mandated factors and the citation was, thus, erroneously issued. Consequently, I vacate the citation, including the penalty.
  • Donna Lally v. State Board of Retirement, CR-06-251 (DALA, 2009)

    Academic/Advising Counselor at a community college whose job routinely and for a majority of her time, involves direct counseling of students in identifying and securing extra academic services while developing their academic plans, holds a “teaching position” in satisfaction of G.L. c. 32, § 3(4) criteria, and is eligible for creditable service for her prior work as a teacher in a Maine public school.
  • David Leroux v. State Board of Retirement, CR-08-665 (DALA, 2010)

    Petitioner has not met his burden of establishing that his disability was the natural and proximate result of the incident on account of which retirement was claimed.
  • Nancy Levine-Wilson v. Teachers' Retirement System, CR-06-216 (DALA, 2009)

    I deny petitioner’s request to purchase her out of state teaching service. G. L. c. 32, sec. (3)(4). I do so because the teaching position she held in Ohio did not require certification from the Ohio Department of Education and, thus, does not meet the definition of teacher in 807 CMR 4.02. Consequently, I do not decide whether her teaching in an “other day school under exclusive public control and supervision” meets the statutory definition of “teacher.” G. L. c. 32, sec. 1.
  • DPH v. Liriano BrosMarket, PH-09-34 (DALA, 2009)

    The Department of Public Health (DPH) was fully warranted in imposing the sanctions as outlined in the December 9, 2008 notice of termination of WIC Vendor Agreement in light of the fact that AA & AG Inc., d/b/a Liriano Market, has committed multiple Class II and Class IV Violations of the WIC Vendor Agreement which are serious and undermine the integrity of WIC Program
  • Mario Loureiro v. OAG, LB-08-386 (DALA, 2009)

    The petitioners filed no response to the order to show cause, and the deadline recited in the order for doing so has passed. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed for lack of prosecution, pursuant to 801 CMR 1.01(7)(g)2, and the appealed citation, No. WHO80101, is hereby affirmed.
  • Karen Lowell v. Worcester Retirement Board, CR-06-296 (DALA, 2009)

    The decision of the Worcester County Retirement Board denying petitioner’s application for accidental disability retirement benefits pursuant to M.G.L. c. 32, § 7 without convening a medical panel is vacated. The petitioner presented sufficient evidence that, if unrebutted and believed, would allow a factfinder to conclude that she suffered a permanent disability based upon emotional injuries sustained while performing her duties as town treasurer/collector that were not the result of bona fide personnel action and is therefore entitled to accidental disability retirement benefits. She is therefore entitled to be examined by a medical panel before her accidental disability retirement benefits application is denied. The Board is ordered to convene a regional medical panel of psychiatrists and consider the panel’s certification (and report, if the Board requests that the panel prepare one), before determining whether her benefits application should be denied or granted.
  • Ralph MacLeod v. Teachers' Retirement System, CR-08-334 (DALA, 2009)

    The Petitioner is not entitled to purchase credit for his vocational work experience under G. L. c. 32, s. 4(1)(h½) because he failed to make an election within 180 days to pay the full invoice amount, or to enter into an installment agreement within 180 days of the invoice date.
  • Leopold Matys v. Teachers' Retirement System, CR-06-1088 (DALA, 2009)

    The decision of the Teacher’s Retirement System to deny this application for accidental disability retirement benefits is affirmed because the Petitioner has not established that he was psychiatrically disabled on his last day of work, and because the Petitioner has failed to meet his burden of proof with respect to causation. The actions of the Principal that the Petitioner cites as causative of his psychiatric disability were not personal injuries, but were bona fide personnel actions that are specifically excluded from the definition of personal injury found in G. L. c. 152, s. 1(7A). The Petitioner did not demonstrate an identifiable condition of employment not common and necessary to all or a great many occupations that caused his disability through gradual deterioration.
  • DPH v. John McDonough, PHET-07-636 (DALA, 2009)

    . The Respondent’s failure to respond to the Order to File Status Report and his subsequent failure to respond to the Order to Show Cause indicates his intention not to defend against the action taken by the Department of Public Health. In light of the foregoing, I recommend that the Petitioner find the allegations contained in the August 9, 2007 Notice of Agency Action – Immediate Suspension of EMT Certification to be true.
  • Michael McGrath v. Saugus Retirement Board, CR-07-1157 (DALA, 2009)

    The Respondent’s Motion to Dismiss is granted on the grounds that the Petitioner’s claim for an accidental disability retirement based on a psychological/psychiatric condition has been litigated and decided in the matters of McGrath v. Saugus Retirement Board, CR-03-722 and McGrath v. Saugus Retirement Board, CR-05-106.
  • Liane Mielke v. Middlesex Retirement Board, CR-07-1154 (DALA, 2010)

    In accordance with the provisions of G.L. c. 32, § 12 (2), the Middlesex Retirement System properly denied the Petitioner’s request for retirement benefits under Option C on behalf of her former husband, Michael Donahue, as she was remarried prior to the effective date of Mr. Donahue’s retirement.
  • Peter Millerick v. Boston Retirement Board, CR-07-370 (DALA, 2008)

    The Petitioner is not entitled to Group 4 classification as he was not employed in municipal gas, electric generating or distribution plant as required by statute for Group 4 classification.
  • Department of Public Health v. M&M Seafodd

    The petitioner demonstrated that M&M Seafood, Inc., its owners, officers, directors and manager should be disqualified from the Women, Infants and Children’s program (the “WIC Program”) for three years for a pattern of overcharging the WIC Program. The petitioner also proved that the respondents violated other provisions in the store’s WIC contract, including participating in activities of questionable business integrity and allowing a WIC participant to use WIC checks to buy unauthorized grocery items. The petitioner did not demonstrate that the respondents trafficked in WIC checks or that the company’s foreign corporation status had been revoked.
  • BRM v. Dr. Dhirendra Mohan, RM-09-908(DALA, 2010)

    Board of Registration in Medicine’s summary suspension of doctor upheld after hearing based on evidence that doctor performed frequent and medically inadequate breast examinations of two patients.
  • William Mungai and Intra American Motor v. OAG, LB-08-286 (DALA, 2009)

    Intra America Motor Carriers did not file an appeal. Accordingly, the civil citation that the office of the Attorney General issued to it is final. William Mungai did not present any evidence or argument on his behalf. He failed, thus, to demonstrate that the citation was erroneously issued to him
  • Alan Munn v. Middlesex Retirement Board, CR-06-284 (DALA, 2009)

    The Petitioner, a former police officer retired on an orthopedic disability, failed to prove that he was disabled due to a cardiac condition prior to his retirement. His Section 94 application under the Heart Law is denied
  • Chabilal Neerghenn v. State Board of Retirement, CR-07-439 (DALA, 2009)

    Primary care and attending physician providing direct care to segregated hospital patients with a diagnosis of advanced dementia with severe disruptive behaviors, is entitled to a G.L. c. 32, s 3(2)(g) Group 2 job classification. Patients found to be "mentally ill" within the Group 2 language, as they meet Department of Mental Health criteria for being mentally ill and could be subject to involuntary hospitalization in a psychiatric facility.
  • Ivan Niero and I.N. Painting v. OAG, LB-08-15 (DALA 2009)

    After a careful review of the evidence, I conclude that Mr. Niero has not met his burden of proof, but that I.N. Painting has demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that the citation against it was erroneously issued.
  • LuAnn Nowill v. State Board of Retirement, CR-08-558 (DALA, 2009)

    Registered Nurse II at Holyoke Soldier's Home who works on Alzheimer's/ Dementia Unit is entitled to Group 2 classification as she is "required to have the care, custody, instruction or other supervision of...persons who are mentally ill or mentally defective…".
  • Jacqueline Ouelette v. Haverhill Retirement Board, CR-08-219 (DALA, 2009)

    PERAC was correct to employ the 75% limitation in G. L. c. 32, s. 7(2)(a)(ii) because the Petitioner was not continuously a member in service from January 1, 1998 to the date her accidental disability retirement allowance became effective on February 14, 2005.
  • DPH v. Ana Pacheco, PHNA-09-59 (DALA, 2009)

    The Department of Public Health (DPH) has demonstrated that on November 13, 2008, the Respondent, Ana Pacheco, engaged in physical abuse of Resident J.V. by kicking him in retaliation for the Resident having scratched her. The Respondent also caused Resident J.V. psychological harm by threatening him. In accordance with federal regulations, a resident has the right to be free from abuse (42 CFR 483.13(b)). I therefore order that the Petitioner take appropriate action in accordance with this decision as required under the provisions of 42 USCS 1396r(g)(1)(c).
  • Sundar Panditv. State Board of Retirement, CR-07-508 (DALA, 2009)

    The evidence shows here that Mr. Pandit was terminated in 2007 for attendance problems that violated the rules of the Department of Revenue. Accordingly, I affirm the decision of the State Board of Retirement to deny Mr. Pandit a termination retirement allowance.
  • Kathleen Parsons v. Norfolk CountyRetirement Board, CR-08-160 (DALA, 2010)

    The Petitioner is not entitled to reinstatement into membership as she withdrew her annuity savings account pursuant to G.L. c. 32, § 10(4) upon her termination of employment by a public employer. She has not returned to public service and Chapter 32 does nor permit reinstatement absent such a return to active service. The assertion that the retirement board failed to inform her of all the potential benefits of maintaining her membership by leaving her annuity savings deductions in the system is irrelevant. A retirement board has no obligation under Chapter 32 to inform a member of all potential benefits of such continued membership.
  • Nathaniel Patterson v. D. Veterans Affairs, VS-09-478 (DALA, 2009)

    M.G.L. c. 115 veterans’ benefits were properly denied based upon voluntary unemployment because the applicant, perceiving a hostile work environment that he no longer found tolerable, decided he would not return to work unless the workplace environment was rectified to his satisfaction, absented himself from work without prior notice to or permission from his supervisor, and therefore quit before his supervisor terminated him after several days of absence.
  • Diane Petrucci v. Wakefield Retirement Board, CR-07-84 (DALA, 2010)

    The Petitioner is entitled to receive full creditable service for the period of time that she worked part-time and received partial incapacity benefits pursuant to G.L. c. 152, § 35. The holding in the case of Christiana Amoah v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board, Suffolk Superior Court, Civil Action No. 2002-0988B is applicable to the facts in this case.
  • Town of Plymouth Recommended Final Decision, 2000-091.xml

    Appeal by petitioners Eel River Watershed Association, Ltd. and Mettie Whipple challenging the Department of Environmental Protection’s issuance, on May 26, 2000, of a permit pursuant to M.G.L. c. 21, §§26-53 allowing the discharge of treated effluent to groundwater by the Town of Plymouth’s municipal wastewater treatment facility at 131 Camelot Drive.Motion by the Department of Environmental Protection and the Town of Plymouth to dismiss appeal for mootness, in view of the issuance on June 24, 2008 of a new groundwater discharge permit.Motion granted, and appeal dismissed as moot without a merits determination and without prej
  • BRM v. Dr. Barry Poret, RM-08-403 (DALA, 2009)

    The Conclusions of Law set forth in the Stipulation by the parties are warranted and are hereby adopted by the Magistrate.
  • Barbara Reed v. Teachers' Retirement System, CR-07-601 (DALA, 2009)

    The Teachers' Retirement System correctly decided that the Petitioner's earnings from her work in the Teachers Challenge Program are not regular compensation because the work was performed during the summer and because she was paid on a per diem basis.
  • Pyramid Mall Recommended Final Decision, DEP-06-371 (DALA, 2009)

    Appeal from wetlands superseding determination of applicability, issued by the Massachusetts DEP on March 7, 2006 under the Wetlands Protection Act, M.G.L. c. 131, § 40 regarding each of two stormwater detention basins at Hampshire Mall on Russell Street (Route 9) in Hadley. Held:(1) neither of the detention basins in Area 1 contains a bordering vegetated wetland, because the vegetated wet area in each basin does not border on a stream; (2) Because no stream is present at either detention basin and neither basin is a pond, there is no land under water bodies and waterways at either detention basin; (3) As no bordering vegetated wetland is present at either detention basin, Pyramid Mall's claim that the detention basins cannot be simultaneously maintained and protected as wetland resource areas under M.G.L. c. 131, sec. 40 is dismissed as moot;(4) Because the parties agree that there are intermittent streams with associated bank in Area 2, work in one area of the property requires a wetlands permit because it contains bank; (5) However, a final determination of applicability should be redacted to eliminate findings as to the presence of other types of wetland resource areas in the same area. These should await determination when Pyramid Mall's pending wetlands permit application for work at the Mall property is reviewed.
  • Ann Reen v. Teachers' Retirement System, CR-05-802 (DALA, 2010)

    The Petitioner is not entitled to have the stipend she received for serving as Guidance “Associate” during the 2002-2005 school years included as regular compensation in the calculation of her superannuation retirement benefit as the remuneration for that stipend is not included in the relevant Collective Bargaining Agreement.
  • BRM v. Dr. Ira Rex, RM-07-1142 (DALA, 2009)

    The Board of Registration in Medicine has not met its burden of proving that the Respondent did not meet the standard of care in his treatment of Patient A, except for his failure to dictate his operative note until four months after surgery.
  • Laura Ramshead v. New Bedford Retirement Board, CR-09-310 (DALA, 2009)

    Petitioner is not entitled to have her application for accidental disability under the Heart Law Presumption (G.L. c. 32, § 94) processed by the Respondent Board on behalf of her deceased husband because once her husband had retired he made this same request that the Respondent Board denied and he never sought to appeal that denial decision despite being informed of his rights to appeal
  • Linda Rings v. Teachers' Retirement System, CR-06-526 (DALA, 2009)

    The Teachers’ Retirement System properly denied the Petitioner’s request to purchase creditable service for her out-of-state service as her employment at Concord University did not meet the required statutory definition of teacher nor was the Lab School a “public school” as defined by G.L. c. 32, §1.
  • Anita Rivers v. Peabody Retirement Board, CR-07-718 (DALA, 2009)

    After an administrative hearing in 2006, the Petitioner was deemed to be entitled to a Medical Panel and the matter was remanded to the local board. A Medical Panel was convened and answered the Certificate in the affirmative. The local Board again denied the application. Summary Decision is not appropriate where the issues for determination in this appeal are different and there are significant issues of material fact.
  • Antonio Rizzo v. Revere Retirement Board, CR-07-333 (DALA, 2009)

    The Revere Retirement Board shall grant accidental disability retirement benefits to the Petitioner because he has sustained his burden of proving that his permanently disabling left knee condition is the natural and proximate result of a personal injury sustained while in the performance of his duties.
  • BRM v. Dr. Suzanne Rothchild, RM-06-241 (DALA, 2010)

    The Board of Registration in Medicine has met its burden of proving that the Respondent’s treatment of Patients A-I included conduct that: fell below good and accepted medical practice standards; was tantamount to the commission of misconduct in the practice of medicine; undermines the public confidence in the integrity of the medical profession; and, calls into question her competence to practice obstetrics. Accordingly, the BRM has proven that the Respondent violated the statutory and regulatory sections Set forth in each of the three Statements of Allegations.
  • Department of Public Health v. S and N Enterprise, PH-07-1110 (DALA, 2009)

    Because the Department of Public Health has established a pattern of overcharging by S and N Enterprise d/b/a Stop and Go, the store and its owner, Mohammad Nusrat, are disqualified from participating in the WIC program for three years.
  • Nicholas Salmon v. TRS and Fall River Retirement System, CR-07-484 (DALA, 2009)

    The Petitioner has not met his burden of demonstrating entitlement to purchase creditable service for the period of time that he served as a Health Educator for the City of Fall River from 1994 through 2002. During that period of time, the Petitioner was deemed an independent contractor and not an employee and as such, in accordance with the provisions of G.L. c. 32, § 3(5), he is not eligible to purchase this service
  • DPH v. Wilmaris Santana, PHNA-08-712 (DALA, 2009)

    ORDER OF DISMISSAL
  • John Scaduto v. Boston Retirement Board, CR-07-493 (DALA, 2009)

    Although Petitioner's holiday, uniform allowance and sick time buy-out pay differentials in his union contract are not regular compensation, his educational, longevity, public safety, and shift commander pay differentials are regular compensation, and should have been included in the calculation of his retirement allowance. Despite inquiring before he received his first retirement check which if any of his pay differentials were part of his retirement calculation, Petitioner never received a response in writing from Respondent. Although the appeal was filed months after the first retirement check was received, Petitioner's appeal is timely filed.
  • Andrea Scichilone v. Brookline Retirement Board, CR-07-728 (DALA, 2010)

    I affirm the decision of respondent. I find that Petitioner, as the G.L. c. 32, § 11(2)(c) beneficiary of the not yet retired deceased member, is not entitled to any benefits because deceased left at his death two minor children entitled to elect through their legal guardian pursuant to G.L. c. 32, § 12(2)(d) and § 12B, the member-survivor allowance under option (d), and to receive monthly allowances while they remain minors or full-time students, or remain alive, and any residual accumulated deductions revert to the pension fund of respondent and cannot be distributed to petitioner.
  • George Shattuck v. Teachers' Retirement System, CR-06-465 (DALA, 2009)

    The remuneration received by the Petitioner for teaching an extra class was not salary and therefore not regular compensation for purposes of computing his retirement allowance where he was paid for each hour that he taught, but was not paid for the hours he did not teach when he was out sick
  • Mayli Shing v. State Board of Retirement (DALA, 2009)

    Respondent properly calculated Petitioner's creditable service in reliance on the data provided by Petitioner's employer. Petitioner failed to show she was erroneously given off-payroll status at certain times. Petitioner cannot receive creditable service for the time periods she received G.L. c. 152, s 35 partial disability workers compensation benefits, but when she worked part-time during those times, she properly received creditable service for those part-time hours. Petitioner cannot receive creditable service for payments received for unused vacation time or for unused sick leave time, because such payments are not regular compensation. Petitioner has under twenty years of creditable service and is under age fifty-five so she is not eligible for a G.L. c. 32, s 10(2) termination allowance or for superannuation retirement.
  • Ronald Sutkus v. State Board of Retirement, CR-09-837 (DALA, 2010)

    I conclude that the Petitioner’s major duties did require him to be involved in the care and instruction of mentally ill persons within the meaning of G.L. c. 32, §3(2)(g). The decision of the State Board of Retirement is hereby reversed. Mr. Sutkus’s group classification is hereby changed from Group 1 to Group 2 for retirement purposes.
  • BRM v. Dr. David Tamaren, RM-08-220 (DALA, 2009)

    Board of Registration in Medicine is granted summary decision because doctor’s federal conviction of conspiracy to commit mail fraud, wire fraud, and health care fraud calls into question his ability to practice medicine and warrants appropriate disciplinary action by the Board
  • Robert Tatro v. State Board of Retirement, CR-09-67 (DALA, 2010)

    The case is remanded to the medical panel to reconsider the issue of disability in light of the risk of re-injury to the Petitioner, using the standard enunciated by CRAB in the case of Filipek v. Bristol Cty. Retirement Board, CR-03-672. If the Petitioner wants to pursue a psychiatric claim for benefits, he must file a new application.
  • Teachers' Retirement System v. Haverhill Retirement Board, CR-06-51 (DALA, 2009)

    The Haverhill Retirement System erred when it refused to follow PERAC’s direction that it accept liability pursuant to G.L. c. 32, § 3(8)(c) with respect to the service of Mr. Albert Rosso as a School Adjustment Counselor for the period of 1995 to 1997. The Haverhill Retirement Board is hereby ordered to accept liability for Mr. Rosso’s service from 1995 to 1997 in accordance with the provisions of G.L. c. 32, § 3(8)(c).
  • BRM v. Dr. Thakur, RM-08-269 (DALA, 2009)

    The Statement of Allegations was not proven. Respondent, when he saw two women in connection with his work as an outside consultant physician addressing their social security disability claims as an internist, did not improperly touch or improperly examine or fondle or squeeze their breasts. He did not make unprofessional comments to them. I found Respondent conducted a proper breast examination as an internist on one of the females and did no breast exam on the other female as she had breast implants. I found no improper touching by Respondent of either woman’s breasts. I found no unprofessional language was used at either examination. I recommend that no discipline be imposed based on these two claims.
  • Denis Toutellotte v. Worcester Retirement Board (DALA, 2009)

    This matter is remanded to the same Medical Panel with instructions to review the report concerning the facet joint injections administered to the Petitioner after the initial Panel examination. After reviewing that report, the Medical Panel should then re-address the first certificate question concerning disability to determine whether it arrives at a different response or whether it re-affirms its original conclusion.
  • Tammy Walker v. Holyoke Retirement Board, CR-07-103 (DALA, 2010)

    The Board’s decision to deny this application for accidental disability retirement benefits without convening a medical panel is affirmed because the Petitioner has failed to demonstrate that she was disabled on her last day of work by her claimed injuries. The Board may terminate the proceedings and deny the application if the member cannot be retired as a matter of law.
  • Daniel Wheelan v. State Board of Retirement, CR-07-515 (DALA, 2009)

    The Petitioner, who was employed as a Social Worker C in the Department of Mental Health, did not meet his burden of proving that his "regular and major duties" required him to have the "care, custody, instruction or other supervision of...ersons who are mentally ill or mentally defective." As such, he was appropriately classified in Group 1.
  • Thomas Younis v. Boston Retirement Board, CR-07-743 (DALA, 2009)

    Petitioner can purchase prior part-time non-membership service for the City of Boston that was subject to annual contracts although not done as an independent contractor, and performed during the same time he held membership in the same retirement system as a full-time teacher receiving full years of creditable service. Due to G.L. c. 32, s 4(1)(a), Petitioner cannot receive more than one year of creditable service per calendar year, but he can receive an additional full year of creditable service during one school year when he was on an unpaid leave of absence while performing this other work. Pursuant to 840 CMR 15.02(2), Petitioner must purchase the most recent prior service first.
  • Zambrano Reconsideration Ruling v. OAG, LB-08-281 (DALA, 2009)

    Nothing in the Motion for Reconsideration shows any facts presented at the hearing that were not given consideration, and nothing in the Motion sets forth any significant factor ignored, or any mechanical or clerical error in the Decision other than the correction of the DALA address at page 2.