Opinion ID: 2268955
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: the fellow-employee exclusion

Text: Home sought to avoid providing coverage to Mrs. Letellier in the pending death action on the basis of paragraph III(2) of its liability policy. That provision provides, in pertinent part, that liability coverage does not extend to any employee with respect to injury to . . . or death of another employee of the same employer injured in the course of such employment in an accident arising out of the maintenance or use of the automobile in the business of such employer. Home contended that Robert Gendron and Joyce Letellier were fellow employees of the City of Biddeford on the day of the accident. Defendant Gendron, on the other hand, maintained that Mrs. Letellier was employed by the Board of Education of the City of Biddeford, which had independent control of the administration of the City's school system, including the operation of the school busing program. [4] We find it unnecessary to resolve these conflicting arguments. In his report the Referee found that upon the facts, Gendron and Letellier were not fellow employees. [5] Rule 53(e) (2) (i) provides: In an action where there has been a reference by agreement, the referee's conclusions of law and findings of fact shall be conclusive unless the order of reference reserves to the parties the right to object to acceptance of the referee's report. Where the right to object has been reserved, any party may within 10 days after being served with notice of the filing of the report serve written objections upon the other parties. Rule 53(e) (2) (ii), M.R.C.P. We have held that a party who has not filed written objections under Rule 53 must be taken to have failed adequately to preserve for appellate scrutiny, as of right, errors in the referee's report. National Adv. Co. v. Inhabitants of Town of York, 345 A.2d 512, 514 (Me.1975). See also Adams v. Alley, 340 A.2d 201, 206 (Me.1975). Home filed no objections to the acceptance of the Referee's report as required by Rule 53 but, in fact, moved formally for the acceptance thereof. Therefore, the Referee's finding that Mr. Gendron and Mrs. Letellier were not fellow employees is conclusive on Home since it failed to take the critical step prerequisite to challenging the conclusion of the Referee, namely, object to the acceptance of the report. [6] While Home was under no obligation to agree to a reference of this case, once it did it was bound to comply strictly with the rules governing the reference procedure. See Mount Desert Yacht Yard, Inc. v. Phillips, 348 A.2d 16, 21 (Me.1975), citing Throumoulos v. Bank of Biddeford, 132 Me. 232, 233, 169 A. 307 (1933).