Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: war injuries compensation insurance act 1943 section 6 workmen to whom the act applies Court: us supreme court Page 1 of about 35 results (0.209 seconds)

Hust Vs. Moore-mccormack Lines, Inc.

Court : US Supreme Court

..... insurance, the united states shall also reimburse the general agent for all crew expenditures, accruing during the term hereof, in connection with the vessels hereunder, including, without limitation, all disbursements for or on account of wages, extra compensation, overtime, bonuses, penalties, subsistence, repatriation, travel expense, loss of personal effects, maintenance, cure, vacation allowances, damages or compensation for death or personal injury or illness, and insurance premiums, required to be paid by law, custom, or by the terms of the ship's articles or labor agreements, or by action of the maritime war ..... the jones act applies by its specific terms only in the presence of the relation of employer to employee, to give the latter a remedy for the employer's negligence, and, since the effect of the general service agreement was to make the seaman technically an employee of the united states, the necessary result was to remit him exclusively to the suits in admiralty act for remedy to enforce the substantive right given by the jones act ..... foreign flag vessels as employees of the united states through the war shipping administration shall, with respect to (1) laws administered by the public health service and the social security act, as amended by subsection (b)(2) and (3) of this section; (2) death, injuries, illness, maintenance and cure, loss of effects, detention, or repatriation, or claims arising therefrom not covered by the foregoing clause (1), and (3) collection .....

Miller Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

..... section 11(3) of the act of december 24, 1919, amending 302 of the war risk insurance act, bringing conclusively within the term "total permanent disability" the specific loss of a hand and an eye, is limited in its operation to compensation allowances, and has no application to war risk insurance ..... to entitle an insured under a policy of war risk insurance to benefits conditioned on total permanent disability, he has the burden of showing not only the character and extent of his injury, but also that, as the result of the injury, he was disabled permanently from following any substantially gainful ..... succinctly stated, petitioner contends (1) that 302, as amended, applies to war risk insurance as well as to compensation allowances; (2) that regulation 3140 is within the power of the administrator of veterans' affairs (who succeeded the director of the bureau), and controls the present case, and (3) that, the foregoing aside, the evidence was sufficient to justify a verdict in his ..... it appeared that, while the insured was unable after the injury (loss of an arm and an eye) to follow the occupation in which he was engaged prior to entering the service (surveying), and while, because of the injury, he was thereafter unable to continue in employments requiring the use of both hands, yet he did undertake other gainful occupations, in which he failed not because of his physical condition but because of his general inaptitude for the work; also, that the policy was permitted to lapse upon .....

Lumbra Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

..... [ footnote 3 ] march 9, 1918, in pursuance of the authorization contained in the war risk insurance act, [ footnote 4 ] the director of the bureau ruled (t.d. 20 w.r. ..... his own statements to medical men, their diagnoses, his repeated applications to the government for compensation, and his failure earlier to assert any claim, show that for a decade he did not believe that he was totally and permanently disabled when he let his policy lapse may 31, 1919. ..... [ footnote 1 ] compensation for death or disability resulting from personal injuries suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty was provided by article 3, act of october 6, 1917, 40 stat. ..... it cannot be said that injury or disease sufficient merely to prevent one from again doing some work of the kind he had been accustomed to perform constitutes the disability meant by the act, for such impairment may not lessen or affect his ability to follow other useful, and perchance more lucrative, occupations. ..... it cannot be said that injury or disease sufficient merely to prevent one from again doing some work of the kind he had been accustomed to perform constitutes the disability meant by the act, for such impairment may not lessen or affect his ability to follow other useful, and perchance more lucrative, occupations. p. .....

United States Vs. Spaulding

Court : US Supreme Court

..... " and, on that day, he certified that he had the following disabilities entitling him to compensation under the war risk insurance act: infection of the left antrum, malocclusion of the teeth, stomach trouble, and heart murmur. ..... a time prior to the lapse, the insured, as the result of chronic and incurable disorders, was partially disabled, and at times and during periods of substantial duration, totally disabled, but that, in the year next following the lapse, he was officially examined and found fit for service as an air pilot, and that, during the larger part of more than eight years between the lapse and the commencement of his suit, he was able to work, and actually did so, and earned substantial compensation. ..... he testified that the antrum infection was incurable, and that, during the period of treatment, respondent had nephritis caused by the infection; that it did not improve; that respondent had impaired his health by working, and that, "in my opinion at the time i first examined him and since that time, he has not been capable of continuously carrying on a substantially gainful occupation without injury to his health. ..... quina, to whom he went daily during the first year and three or four times weekly during the next two. .....

SilberscheIn Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

..... error to a judgment of the district court dismissing an action brought against the united states under subdivision 20 of jud.code 24 on a claim for compensation under the war risk insurance act upon the ground that the determination of the matter by the director of the veterans' bureau was final and not reviewable by the courts. mr. ..... this writ of error brings here for determination the question whether the united states may be sued under subdivision 20, 24, of the judicial code upon a claim for compensation arising under 300 of the war risk insurance act, as amended by 10, c. ..... the war risk insurance act, as amended, commits to the director of the veterans' bureau the duty and authority of administering its provisions and of deciding all questions arising under it. p. ..... disability, to be compensable under the statute, must have resulted from injury or disease caused or aggravated in the line of duty. id. ..... that section, so far as necessary to be stated, provides that compensation shall be paid to any enlisted man for a disability resulting from personal injury suffered or disease contracted in the line of duty when employed in active military service. ..... but, as the court below pointed out, it is not alleged that such evidence showed that such disability resulted from injury or disease caused or aggravated "in the line of duty," as provided by the statute. ..... section 305, c. .....

Ridgway Vs. Ridgway

Court : US Supreme Court

..... paid, provided, allowed, or agreed to be paid by any company on account of the disability from injury or sickness of any insured person shall be liable to execution, attachment, garnishment, or other process, or to be seized, taken, appropriated or applied by any legal or equitable process or operation of law, to pay any debt or liability of such insured person whether such debt or liability was incurred before or after the commencement of such disability, but the provisions of this section shall not affect the assignability of any such disability benefit otherwise assignable, nor ..... , construction and application of provisions of federal statutes in relation to exemption from claims of creditors of amounts paid as pensions, war risk insurance, compensation, bonus, or other relief for veterans, 109 a.l.r. ..... " [ footnote 3/17 ] it is of interest that, in an early case involving a dispute between a serviceman's mother, who had been designated as the sole beneficiary of an insurance policy under the war risk insurance act of 1917, 40 stat. ..... justice powell, with whom justice rehnquist joins, dissenting. ..... see de funiak, community property, 11 (1943). .....

Director, Owcp Vs. Perini North River Assocs.

Court : US Supreme Court

..... question concerns the fact that the longshoreman [ sic ] applies only when the man is over the navigable waters of the united states, and, under whole series of court decisions, there has been established a line where the provisions of the longshore act apply when the man is over the water, and yet the provisions of the state workmen's compensation law applies if the man is ..... case is affirmed, for example, the employer will not only lose the benefit of the state insurance to which he has been compelled to contribute, and by which he has thought himself secured against loss for accidents to his employees; he must also, by virtue of the conclusion that the employee was subject to the federal act at the time of the accident, become liable for substantial ..... as amended in 1972, the section reads: "compensation shall be payable under this act in respect of disability or death of an employee, but only if the disability or death results from an injury occurring upon the navigable waters of the united states (including any adjoining pier, wharf, dry dock, terminal, building way, marine railway, or other adjoining area customarily used by an employer in loading, unloading, ..... to explain the narrow category of workmen associated with motorboat operations for whom parker expressed concern or for whom the court preserves ..... henderson, 138 f.2d 549 (ca5 1943) (workers who trimmed sand and gravel loaded on barges after being ..... government contractors injured overseas by war-risk hazards, act of dec. .....

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. the Steel Stock Holders Syndicate Poona

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : AIR1976SC879; (1976)3SCC108; [1976]3SCR504

..... thus it is clear that there is no question of section 73 of the contract act overriding the provisions of the interest act, because in the instant case the interest act has no application at all inasmuch as no interest is claimed by the plaintiff at all but interest has been used as a measure to determine the compensation which the plaintiff could seek against the appellant for its negligence in causing inordinate delay in the delivery of the goods. ..... when the railways assume this responsibility, broadly speaking, they will be liable for loss of or injury to goods while in transit by rail arising from any cause whatsoever, unless such loss or injury is proved by the railways to have been caused by an act of god, or by an act of war, or by an act of public enemies or is proved to be consequence of inherent vice in the thing carried or is attributable to the consignor's own fault. ..... this court was not at all concerned with a case like the present one where the plaintiff has merely claimed damages pure and simple and in order to assess the same had applied the yardstick of charging interest at a particular rate on the locked up capital for a period of more than six months. ..... in view of the new problems facing the government and the public demand for a change in the law, the government appears to have decided to convert the responsibility of the railway from that of a carrier to that of an insurer. .....

Silas Mason Co. Vs. Tax Commission

Court : US Supreme Court

..... [ footnote 3 ] this contract, like that of ryan, required the contractor to obtain licenses and permits and to furnish compensation insurance in compliance with the workmen's compensation law of the state. ..... of water for use in irrigation, or any portion or section thereof, for which the withdrawal has been effected as provided in section 7410, any authorized officer of the united states, either in the name of the united states or in such name as may be determined by the secretary of the interior, may appropriate, in behalf of the united states, so much of the unappropriated waters of the state as may be required for the project, or projects, for which water has been withdrawn or reserved under the preceding section of this act, including any and all divisions thereof ..... following sporadic improvements extending over a number of years, the corps of engineers of the war department finally made an exhaustive survey, and, in 1932, the chief of engineers of the united states army recommended a comprehensive plan for the development of the columbia river which took into consideration the use of its waters for the purposes of navigation, flood control, power development, and irrigation. ..... even if it were assumed that the state statute should be construed to apply to the federal acquisitions here involved, we should still be met by the contention of the government that it was not compelled to accept, and has not accepted, a transfer of exclusive jurisdiction. .....

Lynch Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

..... section 5 of the economy act, providing: "all decisions rendered by the administrator of veterans' affairs under the provisions of this title or the regulations issued pursuant thereto, shall be final and conclusive on all questions of law and fact, and no other official or court of the united states shall have jurisdiction to review by mandamus or otherwise any such decision," does not relate to war risk insurance, but concerns only pensions, compensation allowances and ..... or retirement pay to veterans and the dependents of veterans of the spanish-american war, including the boxer rebellion and the philippine insurrection, and the world war, or to former members of the military or naval service for injury or disease incurred or aggravated in the line of duty in the military or naval service (except so far as they relate to persons who served prior to the spanish-american war and to the dependents of such persons, and the retirement of officers and enlisted men of the regular army, navy, marine corps ..... the provisions of this act shall not apply to compensation or pension (except as to rates, time of entry into active service and special statutory allowances), being paid to veterans disabled, or dependents of veterans who died, as the result of disease or injury directly connected with active military or naval service (without benefit of statutory or regulatory presumption of service connection) pursuant to the provisions of the laws in effect on the date of enactment of this act .....