Citation network
Herb's Welding, Inc. Vs. Gray
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Mar 18, 1985
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 414 (1985) U.S. Supreme Court Herb's Welding, Inc. v. GraySearch
-
U.S. 414 (1985) Herb's Welding, Inc. v. GraySearch
-
a complaint with the Department of Labor. The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), relying on our decision in Rodrigue v. AetnaSearch
-
regard to the Act's situs requirement, it noted that this Court had compared drilling platforms to wharves in Rodrigue v. AetnaSearch
-
at 179-180, because it was an integral part of the offshore drilling process, which, the court had held in Pippen v. ShellSearch
-
ed.), and because stationary rigs were considered to be islands, Rodrigue v. AetnaSearch
-
Co., supra, oil rig workers inside the 3-mile limit were left to recover under state schemes. See, e.g., Freeman v. ChevronSearch
-
Gifford v. AurandSearch
-
congressional intent behind that legislation has been amply described in our prior opinions. See, e.g., Director, OWCP v. PeriniSearch
-
Northeast Marine Page 470 U. S. 420 Terminal Co. v. CaputoSearch
-
Northeast Marine Terminal Co. v. CaputoSearch
-
P. C. Pfeiffer Co. v. FordSearch
-
a boundary to coverage, and there will always be people who cross it during their employment. Nacirema Operating Co. v. JohnsonSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
as a matter of policy, it is for Congress to change them. We should not legislate for them. See Victory Carriers, Inc. v. LawSearch
-
Hearings). Floating structures have been treated as vessels by the lower courts. E.g., Producers Drilling Co. v. GraySearch
-
F.2d 432, 437 (CA6 1966). Workers on them, unlike workers on fixed platforms, see Rodrigue v. AetnaSearch
-
to Pet. for Cert. A-45. State workers' compensation and the LHWCA are not mutually exclusive remedies. Sun Ships, Inc. V. PennsylvaniaSearch
-
limit recoveries by those who did better without LHWCA coverage. Id. at 589-590, 602. See generally Boudreaux v. AmericanSearch
-
Congress indicated that the specifically mentioned occupations are not exclusive. See P. C. Pfeiffer Co. v. FordSearch
-
Director, OWCP v. PeriniSearch
-
b). The Benefits Review Board so held. He repeats that argument in this Court, as he is free to do. United States v. NewSearch
-
and argued here, and was not discussed by the Court of Appeals. We therefore decline to consider it. See Dandridge v. WilliamsSearch
-
by boat, and might have been covered, before or after 1972, had he been injured while in transit. See Director, OWCP v. PeriniSearch
-
only state coverage, no matter how close the accident may have been to the water's edge. See Nacirema Operating Co. v. JohnsonSearch
-
U. S. 212 (1969). Cf. Victory Carriers v. LawSearch
-
for any injuries incurred after stepping onto the pier. Nacirema Operating Co., supra. See also P. C. Pfeiffer Co. v. FordSearch
-
employment, are engaging in purely land-bound, rather than amphibious, occupations. See Northeast Marine Terminal Co. v. CaputoSearch
-
around the premise that the 1972 Congress had no desire to alter the law of Rodrigue v. AetnaSearch
-
Pure Oil Co. v. SnipesSearch
-
to be a clear pre-1972 concept, is itself highly suspect. In Director, OWCP v. PeriniSearch
-
differences are the result of the offshore workers' proximity to the sea. See supra at 470 U. S. 448 -449. V ForSearch
-
petroleum rigs are classified as vessels in admiralty jurisprudence, see Producers Drilling Co. v. GraySearch
-
quoting Offshore Co. v. RobisonSearch
-
to the limits that we have applied to the word's usage in the maritime jurisdictional statute. Director, OWCP v. PeriniSearch
-
quoting Boudreaux v. AmericanSearch
-
Victory Carriers v. LawSearch
-
U. S. 202 , 404 U. S. 205 , and n. 2 (1971) (quoting Justice Story in Thomas v. LaneSearch
-
as an example of a particularly narrow application of the traditional locality test). In Nacirema Operating Co. v. JohnsonSearch
-
the uniformity of maritime law. Grant Smith-Porter v. RohdeSearch
-
U. S. 469 , 257 U. S. 477 (1922). See also Western Fuel Co. v. GarciaSearch
-
doctrine. See Calbeck v. TravelersSearch
-
Davis v. DepartmentSearch
-
Parker v. MotorSearch
-
for shipbuilding were not traditionally considered within admiralty contract jurisdiction. See People's Ferry Co. v. BeersSearch
-
Pippen v. ShellSearch
-
them as distinct occupations. For example, some workers work on both fixed and floating rigs. See, e.g., Pippen v. ShellSearch
-
In Northeast Marine Terminal Co. v. CaputoSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Herb's Welding, Inc. v. GraySearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial