20 C.F.R. § 202.13

Electric railways

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The Deputy General Counsel will require the submission of information pertaining to the history and operations of an electric railway with a view to determining whether it is an employer and will inquire into and make his recommendations upon the following considerations:

(1) Whether the electric railway is more than a street, suburban or interurban electric railway; or

(2) Whether it is operating as a part of a general steam-railroad system of transportation; or

(3) Whether it is part of the national transportation system.

(b) If in the opinion of the Deputy General Counsel an electric railway has the characteristic set forth in either paragraphs (a)(1), (2), or (a)(3) of this section, he will conclude that it is an employer under the act and if the operator concurs in such opinion, the decision will be made final by the Board. If the operator does not concur in the conclusion reached the question will be submitted to the Interstate Commerce Commission for determination.

(45 U.S.C. 231f(b)(5)) [4 FR 1478, Apr. 7, 1939, as amended at 48 FR 51448, Nov. 9, 1983]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 1998–1998 · leading case: DiVirgilio v. Apfel, 21 F. Supp. 2d 76 (D. Mass. 1998).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

DiVirgilio v. Apfel, 21 F. Supp. 2d 76 (D. Mass. 1998). “In making her disability determination, however, the ALJ concluded that Plaintiff had a residual functional capacity for light work and correctly applied 20 C.F.R. §§ 202.13 , 202.14 and 202.15. As a result, the ALJ determined that, regardless of whether Plaintiffs semi-skilled…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.