Legal Opinion
Barker v. Donovan
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided November 30, 1983No. 82-7772Published
1Opinion of the Court
WALTER E. HOFFMAN, Senior District Judge.
Petitioners, Barker, et aL, are claiming benefits under the Redwood Employee Protection Program, Pub.L. No. 95-250, §§ 201-213, 92 Stat. 172 (1978) (REPP). In order to qualify for such benefits, petitioners must first establish that they worked for an “affected employer” as defined by § 201(6) of the Act. The Secretary has refused to grant such status to petitioners’ former employer. Petitioners seek review of this refusal.
The salient facts are fairly simple. The Simpson Timber Company (Simpson) owned a nursery facility at Korbel, California since…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Udall v. TallmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- William F. Lanning v. Honorable Ray Marshall, Secretary of LaborCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- Drapich v. DonovanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Albert J. Hoehn v. Honorable Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of LaborCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
- Bradford v. DonovanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982