Legal Opinion
Hughes v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided October 4, 1985No. 84-264PublishedCited by 85 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NEWMAN, Associate Judge:
Hughes petitions for review of a decision of the District of Columbia Department of Employment Services (DOES) that because his employment was not “principally localized in the District of Columbia” as required by The Workers Compensation Act (WCA), D.C.Code § 36-303(a) (1981), 1 his on-the-job injury in Virginia was not com-pensable under the District of Columbia statute. He contends that the decision is defective on substantive and procedural grounds. We affirm.
The facts are not in dispute. Hughes is employed by Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA)…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- National Labor Relations Board v. Bell Aerospace Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Cardillo v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by85 opinions
- United States Parole Commission v. NobleDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1997
- Smith v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- Grillo v. National Bank of WashingtonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- Meiggs v. Associated Builders, Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
- Thomas v. District of Columbia Department of Employment ServicesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1988
80 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.