Legal Opinion
Tuey v. Donovan
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided February 22, 1984No. Nos. 82-7247, 82-7482PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
REINHARDT, Circuit Judge:
Petitioners seek review of decisions by the Assistant Secretary of Labor denying them benefits that are available to displaced lumber industry workers under Title II of the Redwood National Park Expansion Act (Redwood Act), Pub.L. No. 95-250, 92 Stat. 163 (1978).1 We hold that the Assistant Secretary acted unreasonably in interpreting the relevant statutory language so as to deny petitioners those benefits. In *538doing so, we reject his conclusion that divisions of an “affected contract employer” may be excluded from coverage of the Act if the divisions are not within or…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Federal Power Commission v. Texaco Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- William F. Lanning v. Honorable Ray Marshall, Secretary of LaborCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- Emma L. David v. Honorable Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of LaborCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- Drapich v. DonovanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Ashcom v. DonovanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Danny W. Tuey, and Leslie A. Dehaven v. Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary of Labor, Donald L. Scott, William G. Gillespie, Archie T. Lawrence v. Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary of LaborCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984