§Why CasetextPricing

Weaver et al v. Signal Mountain Cement Co. et al

MOTION for Summary Judgment

29 Cited authorities

  1. Chandris, Inc. v. Latsis

    515 U.S. 347 (1995)   Cited 682 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Jones Act and the LHWCA are "mutually exclusive compensation regimes"

  2. Miles v. Apex Marine Corp.

    498 U.S. 19 (1990)   Cited 760 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that when Congress incorporated the Federal Employers’ Liability Act ("FELA") into the Jones Act without alteration, it also incorporated the prior judicial interpretation of FELA in the Act, as that interpretation was "well established," and "Congress is aware of existing law when it passes legislation"

  3. McDermott International, Inc. v. Wilander

    498 U.S. 337 (1991)   Cited 527 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Jones Act status turns on the employee's “precise relation” to the vessel

  4. Scindia Steam Navigation Co. v. De Los Santos

    451 U.S. 156 (1981)   Cited 644 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that when no contract, positive law, or custom was alleged, shipowner was not responsible for dangerous condition arising during cargo loading operations

  5. Harbor Tug Barge Co. v. Papai

    520 U.S. 548 (1997)   Cited 306 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a worker hired to paint a tugboat while it was moored at a dock was not a seaman

  6. Southwest Marine, Inc. v. Gizoni

    502 U.S. 81 (1991)   Cited 220 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a jury could reasonably find that floating platforms were "vessels in navigation" under the Jones Act

  7. Northeast Marine Terminal Co. v. Caputo

    432 U.S. 249 (1977)   Cited 325 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding an injury sustained while unloading a cargo container under the Longshoremens' and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act

  8. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs v. Perini North River Associates

    459 U.S. 297 (1983)   Cited 185 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that presence of one party with standing assures that controversy before Court is justiciable

  9. South Chicago Co. v. Bassett

    309 U.S. 251 (1940)   Cited 288 times
    In South Chicago Coal Dock Co. v. Bassett, 309 U.S. 251 (1940), we rejected a claim to seaman status grounded on the employee's job title, which also happened to be "deckhand.

  10. Swanson v. Marra Bros

    328 U.S. 1 (1946)   Cited 189 times
    Holding that the Harbor Workers' Act provided the exclusive remedy by the longshoreman against his employer and that he could not sue under the Jones Act

  11. Section 905 - Exclusiveness of liability

    33 U.S.C. § 905   Cited 1,880 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Providing that the employer’s liability for covered injuries "shall be exclusive and in place of all other liability of such employer to the employee"

  12. Section 902 - Definitions

    33 U.S.C. § 902   Cited 1,095 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Defining "employer" for LHWCA purposes

  13. Section 30104 - Personal injury to or death of seamen

    46 U.S.C. § 30104   Cited 997 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Granting injured seamen a right to a jury trial in Jones Act cases

  14. Section 903 - Coverage

    33 U.S.C. § 903   Cited 707 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Providing benefits only for injuries occurring "upon the navigable waters" of the United States

  15. Section 904 - Liability for compensation

    33 U.S.C. § 904   Cited 293 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Establishing the employer's liability for compensation