Legal Opinion

Rainey v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided February 28, 2008No. 07-0434-agPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KATZMANN, Circuit Judge:

The Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA), 33 U.S.C. § 901 et seq., creates a presumption of causation: covered workers who suffer a harm that workplace conditions could have caused, aggravated, or accelerated benefit from § 920(a), which presumes, in the absence of substantial evidence to the contrary, that their claims for compensation fall within the regulatory scheme created by the LHWCA. 33 U.S.C. § 920(a). This case calls on us to address the nature of the evidence that an employer must introduce in order to rebut this presumption. We hold that…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Richardson v. PeralesSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  3. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs v. Greenwich CollieriesSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  4. American Grain Trimmers, Inc., and Frank Gates-Acclaim v. Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, and Marian JanichCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1999
  5. Conoco, Inc. v. Director, Office of Worker's Compensation ProgramsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1999

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Filosi v. Elec. Boat Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2018
  2. Rainey v. DIR., OFFICE OF WORKERS'COMPENSATIONCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008
  3. Stanhope v. United States Department of LaborCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2009
  4. Stanhope v. United States Department of LaborCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API