How cited: Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Billy R. Vinson, and Director, Office of Workers' Compensatio… · Go Syfert

Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Billy R. Vinson, and Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor (1980)

green · 59 citation events across 11 courts. Showing the 19 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1980 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
198020032026
Rule Authority · 5th Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion
It is instructive to compare the 1969 award with that in Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117, 1118 (5th Cir. 1980).
Rule Authority · 5th Cir. · 2 citations in this opinion
That which we call a rose/ By any other name would smell as sweet."). 4 It is instructive to compare the 1969 award with that in Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117, 1118 (5th Cir. 1980).
Rule Authority · 11th Cir.
Here, as in Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117, 1121-22 (5th Cir.1980), 1 Hilliard was afforded an opportunity to address the ex parte communication, but failed to do so.
Rule Authority · 5th Cir.
The timeliness of a claim is presumed under the LHWCA, and the burden to show that a claim was not filed rests on employers such as Friede Goldman. 33 U.S.C. § 912 (b)(2) (2000); Avondale Shipyards Inc. v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117, 1119-21 (5th Cir.1980).
Rule Authority · 5th Cir. · signal: cf.
See 29 C.F.R. § 18.103 (rulings on evidence in hearings before ALJ; may notice “plain errors affecting substantial rights”); cf. Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117, 1121-22 (5th Cir. 1980) (finding no error in admission of ex parte medical report because objecting party afforded post-hearing cross-examination).
finding no error in admission of ex parte medical report because objecting party afforded post-hearing cross-examination
Rule Authority · 2d Cir.
Cir. 1987)(noting that the § 920(b) presumption applies to "any proceeding" under "this chapter"); Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117, 1120-21 (5th Cir. 1980)(finding sufficient notice under § 912 based on § 920(b) presumption, and concluding that sufficiency of notice under § 912 "mandates . . . holding that [employee's] suit was timely filed" based on § 930(f) tolling provision).
finding sufficient notice under § 912 based on § 920(b) presumption, and concluding that sufficiency of notice under § 912 "mandates . . . holding that [employee's] suit was timely filed" based on § 930(f) tolling provision
Rule Authority · 2d Cir.
See, e.g., Stark v. Washington Star Co., 833 F.2d 1025, 1028 (D.C.Cir.1987)(noting that the § 920(b) presumption applies to “any proceeding” under “this chapter”); Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117, 1120-21 (5th Cir.1980)(finding sufficient notice under § 912 based on § 920(b) presumption, and concluding that sufficiency of notice under § 912 “mandates ... holding that [employee’s] suit was timely filed” based on § 930(f) tolling provision).
Rule Authority · 8th Cir.
Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117, 1121-22 (5th Cir.1980).
Rule Authority · 8th Cir.
Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117, 1121-22 (5th Cir. 1980).
green Lewis v. Young (2016)
Rule Authority · La. Ct. App.
See 33 U.S.C. § 920 (b) ("In any proceeding for the enforcement of a claim for compensation under this chapter is shall be presumed, in the absence of substantial evidence to the contrary ... [t]hat sufficient notice of such claim has been given.”); Avondale Shipyards, Inc, v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117, 1120 (5th Cir.1980).
Rule Authority · E.D. Tex.
Moreover, even if the present suit was filed after the LHWCA limitations period, the limitation period may be tolled if (1) employer failed, neglected, or refused to file an injury report with the Secretary of Labor within ten days from when it became knowledgeable of such injury, see 33 U.S.C. § 930 (f) (2000); Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117, 1121 (5th Cir. 1980); Base Billeting Fund, Laughlin Air Base v. Hernandez, 588 F.2d 173 , 177 (5th Cir. 1979); Ass…
Rule Authority · Miss.
E.g., Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117, 1120 (5th Cir.1980); Stevenson v. Linens of the Week, 688 F.2d 93 , 98 (D.C.
Cited · 5th Cir. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion
See Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117 , 1119 n.l (5th Cir. 1980); see also Island Operating Co., Inc. v. Dir., Office of Worker’s Comp.
Cited · 11th Cir. · signal: see
See Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117 , 1119– 20 (5th Cir. 1980); 3 Del Monte Fresh Produce v. Dir., OWCP, 563 F.3d 1216, 1219 (11th Cir. 2009).
Cited · 5th Cir. · signal: see
See id.
Cited · 11th Cir. · signal: see
See Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117 , 1119 n. 1 (5th Cir.1980).
Cited · 5th Cir. · signal: see
See Potomac Electric Power Co. v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, --- U.S. ----, 101 S.Ct. 509 , 66 L.Ed.2d 446 (1980). 9 "When the court of appeals reviews decisions of the BRB, then, its only function is to correct errors of law and to determine if the BRB has adhered to its proper scope of review-i. e., has the Board deferred to the ALJ's fact-finding or has it undertaken de novo review and substituted its views for the ALJ's." 623 F.2d at 1119 n.1 10 …
Cited · 1st Cir. · signal: see
See Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117 , 1119 n. 1 (5th Cir. 1980); Air America, Inc. v. Director, OWCP, 597 F.2d 773, 780 (1st Cir. 1979).
Cited · 1st Cir. · signal: see
See Avondale Shipyards, Inc. v. Vinson, 623 F.2d 1117 , 1119 n. 1 (5th Cir. 1980); Air America, Inc. v. Director, OWCP, 597 F.2d 773, 780 (1st Cir. 1979). 13 Despite the Board's restricted fact-finding authority, we conclude for several reasons that its foray into the record was justified in this case.