Decision  Angelo Resendes v. John Healy & Co.

Date:	12/26/2000
Organization:	Department of Industrial Accidents
Docket Number:	DIA Board No. 040253-90
Location:	Boston

• Employee: Angelo Resendes
• Employer: John Healy & Co.
• Insurer: Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.

MCCARTHY, J. The employee appeals from a decision in which an administrative judge denied and dismissed his claim for §28 benefits based on the employer’s alleged serious and wilful misconduct, as well as his claim for further partial incapacity benefits. Because "the decision is firmly grounded in the evidence and . . . the law was correctly applied to the facts found in determining that a §28 violation had [not] occurred," Luis v. Merrimack Valley Roofing Co., 9 Mass. Workers’ Comp. Rep. 784, 786 (1995), we affirm.¹ The story of Mr. Resendes’ brush with death by electrocution, when his air-driven chipping gun came into contact with a 13.8 kilovolt Boston Edison line in the course of digging a trench for a water pipe, is carefully detailed by Justice Ireland in Resendes v. Boston Edison Co., 38 Mass. App. Ct. 344 (1995). For the purposes of this appeal, we recount only such portions of the administrative judge’s decision as are pertinent to the issues that we address.

1 We summarily affirm the judge’s denial of the employee’s claim for further §35 benefits.