Document: 521 U.S. 121117 S.Ct. 1953138 L.Ed.2d 327 METROPOLITAN STEVEDORE COMPANY, Petitioner,v.John RAMBO, et al. No. 96-272. Supreme Court of the United States Argued March 17, 1997. Decided June 19, Syllabus * Respondent Rambo, injured while doing longshore work for petitioner Metropolitan Stevedore Company, received a compensation award under Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA or Act), based on parties' stipulation that he had sustained permanent partial disability. After Rambo acquired new skills as longshore-crane operator began making about three times his pre-injury earnings, moved to modify LHWCA award. Despite an absence evidence Rambo's physical condition improved, Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ordered benefits discontinued because increased earnings. The Benefits Review Board affirmed, but Ninth Circuit reversed ground §22 authorizes modification only changed conditions. This in turn Co. v. 515 291, 115 2144, 132 226, holding Act's fundamental purpose is economic, compensate employees wage-earning capacity lost injury; where has been reduced, restored, basis changes statutory scheme allows modification, id., at 296-298, S.Ct., 2147-2148, even without any change condition, 301, 2150. On remand, again order discontinuing compensation. It recognized when worker suffers significant impairment experiencing present loss there may be serious tension between §8(h)'s mandate account disability's future effects determining (and thus entitlement compensation), §22's prohibition against issuing pay more than one year after ends denial entered. court reconciled two provisions by reading authorize nominal subject later if conditions should change. held was ALJ's overemphasis current status failure consider effect remanded case entry Held: 1.A entitled work-related injury not diminished circumstances, potential will cause refers compensable economic harm "disability,'' defining term measure earning result injury, §2(10). Section 8(c)(21) sets disability due unscheduled injuries percentage difference worker's average weekly wages thereafter, §8(h) explains such determined actual earnings they fairly reasonably represent capacity; not, factfinder may, "in interest justice,'' fix shall "reasonable,'' having regard for, inter alia, "the it naturally extend into future.'' A problem applying these arises situation here issue, presently least much before anticipate combination job-market leave him with lower capacity, must nevertheless file claim within §13(a). If awarded no compensation, bar from seeking response year. To implement this class cases, "disability'' read broadly enough cover just product job market conditions, opportunities future. Thus, treated disability, albeit one. "reasonable'' justice'' (to use language) reflect merely correspondingly Ordering holds open possibility upward circumstances so warrant. approach consistent wait-and-see adopts generally respect questions, best way reconcile requirements §§13(a) 22. Court's view point coincides with, reinforced by, position Director Office Programs (OWCP), who charged administering Act. would imprudent attempt resolve all time question how high need nominal, since issue addressed parties. Those courts have dealt matter required showing decline and, rulemaking OWCP point, standard. Pp. ____-____. 2.Although adopted correct legal standard, erred directing its own appraisal evidence, rather remanding ALJ further findings fact. Since Act, see §21(b)(3), (c), duty, Appeals's, whether sufficiently likely justify failed do so. 81 F.3d 840 (C.A.9 1996), vacated remanded. SOUTER, J., delivered opinion Court, which REHNQUIST, C. STEVENS, KENNEDY, GINSBURG, BREYER, JJ., joined. O'CONNOR, filed dissenting opinion, SCALIA THOMAS, Robert E. Babcock, Santa Ynez, CA, petitioner. Malcolm Stewart, Brookhaven, MS, federal respondent. Thomas J. Pierry, III, Wilmington, private Justice SOUTER Court. 1 us second time, now raising bars able earn injured. We hold proper fall below level sometime 2 John back leg 1980 Company. claimed 44 Stat. 1424, amended, 33 U.S.C. §901 seq., parties stipulated 22 &1/2 normally $120.24 $534.38 wage. This, turn, reduced $80.16 per week §8(c)(21) §908(c)(21), providing rate 66 & 2/3 employee's post-injury capacity. An entered incorporating App. 51; (Rambo I), 293, 2146-2147, 226 (1995). 3 trained crane got full-time skills, occasional stints heavy-truck extra pay. His resulting annual 1985 1990 were what made injury. As consequence, 1989 earlier award, §22, §922, hearing ALJ. While payments tripling earnings: 4 "After taking consideration increase inflation salary particular job, evident [Rambo] longer loss. Although testified might lose some shows greater risk losing anyone else. Moreover, offered show [Rambo's] age, education, vocational training are employment event Likewise, does employer beneficent contrary, full operator, heavy lift truck available so.'' 55. 5 See also I, supra, 293-294, 2146-2147. 6 affirmed order, 57, 61, Appeals Director, OWCP, 28 86 (1994). " [t]he (or their beneficiaries) modification.'' U.S., 298, 2148. essence physical, affected "even condition,'' 7 payments. claimant's §8(h), §908(h), denying §922. statute 840, 844 1996). ending unsupported substantial "overemphasi[sis on] fail[ure] earnings,'' ibid., reflecting 845.1 granted certiorari. 519 ----, 117 504, 136 395 (1996). we agree certain despite ability wage, vacate judgment remand factfinding II 8 such, decreased wages. 297-298, 2147-2148. speaks defined "incapacity employee receiving same other employment,'' §2(10), §902(10). Such incapacity conclusively presumed enumerated "scheduled'' injuries, compensated over specified periods time. §§8(c)(1)-8(c)(20), 8(c)(22), §§908(c)(1)-(20), 908(c)(22); Potomac Elec. Power Programs, 449 268, 269, 101 509, 510-511, 446 (1980). For other, so-called "unscheduled'' less total "66 centum [pre-injury] thereafter.'' §8(c)(21), §908(c)(21) (permanent disability); §8(e), §908(e) (temporary disability). figuring difference, "wage-earning capacity'' 9 "by capacity: Provided, however, That deputy commissioner justice, reasonable, nature degree impairment, usual employment, factors affect disabled including §908(h). 10 §10, §910 (method wages). 11 summarize implications way. Disability By distinguishing itself, relation both old makes clear market. Capacity, necessarily reflected earned 300-301, 2149-2150; Power, 272, n. 5, 511, fact-finder make determination takes effects, §8(h). 12 In cases disparity obvious, along reasons it. chooses all, windfall avoided awarding benefit accordingly. See, e.g., Penrod Drilling Johnson, 905 F.2d 84, 87-88 (C.A.5 1990). At extreme, nonetheless fortunate receive appropriate (say, generous, whatever reason). Travelers Ins. McLellan, 288 250, 251 (C.A.2 1961); Edwards 999 1374, 1375-1376 1993) (holding short-lived market). Once again, still calculated corresponding made. 13 applicable like one, however. receives higher those And yet (we assume now) likelihood person meaning statute, so, provision 14 There treat statute. first follows law face waiting adverse occur bringing claim, §13(a), §913(a); Pillsbury Engineering Co., 342 197, 72 223, 96 L.Ed. 225 (1952). He barred new, modified date termination benefits. Because wage promptly, Congress intended include injury-related wage-loss.2 claimant loses benefits, equally obtain anticipation 15 conclusion confirmed natural given "due regard'' "factors [a claimant's] condition.'' phrased general terms, practical limited here, depresses prevailing unquestionably immediately, already means liberally permits awards last payment benefits). I whenever (let alone physical) reduces, restores, improves 296-297, 2146-2147.3 ongoing possibilities become realities, calculating immediately disability; plainly contingencies here.4 standard illustration practice basing determinations reality. initial discounted odds obtaining strenuous higher-paying future, could hardly permitted reduction actually found using skills. simply operative made, revise changed. 16 admonition application, apply solely ignored altogether denied (yet) declined, then, must, words, cognizable category potentially substantial, character. 17 being, disability) decline, basic methods choose this. one-time calculation periodic following common torts, bases lump-sum estimate . value plaintiff's services harm.'' Restatement (Second) Torts §924, Comment d, p. 525 (1977). predictive ordinarily requires every possible variable impact earn, [e]nvironmental labor market, chance advancement being laid off, like.'' F. Harper, James, O. Gray, §25.8, pp. 550-551 (2d ed.1986) (footnote omitted). Prediction well most troublesome step wide-ranging inquiry shows, vary greatly opportunity varies, turns part probabilities suitable jobs ranges open. calculations, room error.5 Cf. 553 determine juries often "use (in effect, speculate)''). tort routinely engage difficult predictions (compounded discounting value) price paid common-law finality judgment. 18 developments through run cases: wait see, is, base realities permit modifications manifested way, exchanged accuracy, compensating charging insurer amount alone. 19 denies second, alternative open, arguing gives choices: either deny diminished, or, concludes income calculate extent consequent compensation) toto relevant factors, Brief Petitioner 9. What said, unsoundness Metropolitan's options. 20 than) afoul fashioning one-year limitations foreclose responding arise.6 hand, trying honor comprehensive prediction inherently uncertain would, seen, almost always over- undercompensation. passing strange credit intent guarantee fairness employers imperfectly foreseeable, find decline.7 21 moreover objection proposed They implicitly reject very sense combined limiting claims mandating effects: whose indeed, realization points toward employ provide decline. language §8(h)) conjunction training, depress level, turning scope promotes preserves administrative simplicity obviating cumbersome inquiries relating entire range states affairs,8 avoids imputing unlikely join rule predict-the-future method results can earn. Our view, out, taken administration construes permitting mechanism remains undiminished. 12-21, 24-31. Secretary Labor delegated bulk her authority administer enforce rule-making power, Newport News Shipbuilding Dry Dock 514 122, 125-126, 1278, 1283, 131 160 (1995); Ingalls Shipbuilding, Inc. 796, 804-805, 736 (1997), Director's reasonable interpretation brings added persuasive force our conclusion, Skidmore Swift 323 134, 140, 65 161, 164, 89 124 (1944) (giving weight agency's interpretation, agency lacks "power control''); Robinson Shell Oil 843, 848, 808 (1997). 23 course, parties, address pretense settling Here recall option probability occurrence remote original Consistent application suggests instances shown statistical likelihood. explicitly wages, Hole Miami Shipyards Corp., 640 769, 772 1981); Randall Comfort Control, Inc., 725 791, 800 (C.A.D.C.1984), specifying adopt standard.9 24 therefore III 25 depends burden persuasion allocated. 7(c) APA, §556(d), applies adjudications Greenwich Collieries, 512 267, 270, 114 2251, 2254, 129 221 (1994), places proponent 272-281, 2255-2260; evenly balanced, loses, 281, 2259-2260. preponderance But seeks previously establishing justifying modification. this, prior finding entered, satisfies risen above showing, rise presumption equal current, presumption, shifts sufficient emphasize proof; assumed pro forma convenience cases. 26 case, suffered 1/2 whereby established impaired undertake types gainful prevented accident. sought persuasive, significantly record supporting decision terminate (as opposed nominal) depressed. future.10 proceedings improved recovery, raises operator. terminating §§921(b)(3), fact, F.2d, 799-800 (remanding award), instead evidence. Circuit's insofar directs opinion. 27 ordered. whom THOMAS join, dissenting. 29 today judge longshoreman dropped, probably never drop, believe demonstrates capacity-that power-I respectfully dissent. 30 matter, note my agreement starting analysis. medical, concept. Ante, __; 297, 2147, eligibility (i.e., currently eligible today. ante, __-__. 31 company because, LHWCA, up-front "fix[es]'' hence Second, supported pursuant Procedure (APA), §551 Finally, expressly respondent suffer reverse direct 32 My disagreement exceed money drop 8(h) provides: "The 34 adjudicator postpone power long "significant possibility'' someday come pass. __. Until rules, thereby propping door seek 35 purely guard power. Instead, longshoreman's factored concrete, immediate dictated calls "fairly capacity.'' comparison assigns dollar instructs that, correspond true "fix reasonable.'' Again, "fix[ing]'' definite assessment gone up, down, remained same; leaves equivocal 36 composite concept, measured partly ability. Accordingly, predictable lists main account: credits doctor's testimony five years bedridden, regardless Just mean predicted variations fixing Quite them; otherwise, putting off another day. 37 regarding disagree ever, purposes "nominal disability.'' (however slight be), not. say disability,'' far tell, answers half question, hence, 38 conflates foreseeable considered unforeseeable developments, reopening acknowledges orders light "change conditions.'' All arise determination, adjust If, proceeding, included catch recognition 39 damages designed circumvent 1-year limit terminated claims. effectively recognizes much, candidly admits approach, "finality accuracy.'' period sacrificed avoid undercompensation straightforward LHWCA. Ibid. evaluated policy concerns, down side enacting §22. When cannot demonstrate terms conditions'' certainly violates spirit, letter, 40 trade-off accuracy reasoned debate. Indeed, state legislatures agreed better until manifests itself. amended workers' statutes allow precisely sort nominal-benefits approves Cal. Code Ann. §5802 (West.1989) ("If, proceeding division, proved , resulted, appeals board dismissing indemnity, appears time''). amends think us. money. 41 APA leads holds) believe). determination. 42 explained Part ultimate fact capacity,'' component. contrary [in capacity], occurrence,'' __, 9, governs proof.'' §556(d); §919(d) ("any [the LHWCA] conducted accordance of'' APA). proof 270-271, 2254-2255, 43 falls short APA's preponderance-of-the-evidence although fails define specificity, tells "high likelihood.'' paycheck shrunk, ever shrink, levels apparently result, seems me, exactly backwards. Not conflict plucks out thin air. rely perception "symmetry'' LHWCA: symmetry goal, then logically threshold (beyond itself) completely [c]onsistent application'' "wait-and-see'' theory (derived §22) call keeping events reduce realizes eviscerate period, feels obliged screen attenuated stopgap, invents test. 45 supposed "asymmetry'' something circumvented, attributable Congress' place strict Under function money, screens arbitrary line-drawing salvage role period. 46 final "no loss,'' 55, upheld set forth described 47 Metropolitan, met demonstrating proving steadily working Upon shifted did dip levels. 48 written ruling, gave consideration. observed, "higher gains/losses determinative One normal 53 (citation specifically commented prospects: "Claimant Claimant Claimant's one.'' Id., statement, adequately prospects-that 49 §921(b)(3) (setting review findings). extremely deferential factfinder: "Substantial mere scintilla. mind accept adequate support conclusion.'' Consolidated Edison NLRB, 305 229, 59 206, 217, 83 126 (1938). Based submitted "reasonable mind'' undoubtedly accurately prospects. learned operate cranes trucks (tasks perform injury), 30-31; worked shipping line years, 37; 38. clearly loss.'' 50 properly demand Board's Appeals' reversed. syllabus constitutes prepared Reporter Decisions reader. Detroit Timber Lumber 200 321, 337, 282, 287, 499. Reinhardt dissented grounds. F.3d, 845. different might, perhaps, drawn observation ago Pillsbury, 198-199, 224-225, allowed recovery had. authorized anticipated §13(a) defer litigation indefinitely capacity-loss undercutting inference conceived enacted workers establish elements entitling them protective filings deferring adjudication loss, approaches appear, former unlike latter, defect element matters grows stale. draw noted fluctuation underlying skill availability jobs. "There questions here.'' resembles virtually schemes. A. Larson L. Larson, Workmen's §81.10, 15-1045 (1996), [I]t advantages device schemes] commission moment impossible predict worry forever bound appraisal.'' §81.31(a), 15-1127 15-1132 (footnotes periodically life lump sum, §§14(a), (b), §§914(a), (b) (providing compensation). modifying affects only, retroactively adjusting payment. "Under typical form objectives [workers' compensation] legislation accomplished increase, decrease, revive, subject, laws, limitations. 15-1045; §81.21, 15-1046 15-1047. simplified example decide 75% $60,000, 25% remaining unemployed prevent performing work, weighted $45,000. (($60,000 X .75) + ($0 .25) = $45,000.) Of somehow each right, rarely developments. hypothetical, $15,000 kept $45,000 other. average, end up undercompensated, though meet system whole. escape rests implausible could, arguably, preserve right reapplying successively thereafter. §922 (permitting "at rejection claim''). premise repeatedly reapplications knowing (on theory) himself good-faith sought. legislative history 1938 amendments indicates understood reference subsection interact allowing narrowed declined: [Section 8(h)]provides upon Often returns secure definitely compete affected; "In unscrupulous profit continue (sec.22) run, defeat[ing] Act.'' H.R.Rep. No.1945, 75th Cong., 3d Sess., 5-6 (1938); S. Rep.1988, Sess. Walters Ed. Enterprises, 660, 664, 665, 644 (1997) (weighing favor permissible construction statute). argues persuasion, (see infra, __) occur. 22-23. confuses certainty needed established, trier existence probable nonexistence [he] party persuade [judge] fact's existence.'' Concrete Pipe Products Cal., Construction Laborers Pension Trust Southern 508 602, 622, 113 2264, 2279, 539 (1993) (internal quotation marks goes convincing found, facts proven substantive defense. Collieries 990 730, (C.A.3 ("A [e]vidence opposition '') omitted), aff'd, 246, 2239, 203 Unlike standards doubt "allows share error roughly fashion,'' Herman MacLean Huddleston, 459 375, 390, 103 683, 691, 74 548 (1983) except "when [party persuasion] lose,'' 2259, predicting none) occurrence, maintain. Even assuming formally promulgated deference Chevron U.S.A. Natural Resources Defense Council, 467 837, 104 2778, 694 (1984), 1287, (1995), allocating reasons. —(1) administering. Ardestani INS, 502 129, 148, 112 515, 526, 116 496 (1991) (Blackmun, dissenting); Chevron, 842, 2781; Professional Reactor Operator Soc. NRC, 939 1047, 1051 (C.A.D.C.1991). —(2) appear embodied regulation similar binding pronouncement apply. Smiley Citibank (South Dakota), N. A., 517 1730, 1733-1734, 135 (1996); K. Davis R. Pierce, Treatise §3.5, 120 (3d ed.1994). —(3) couched logical non-sequitur, explained. dissent Post, relied addresses __-__ (current capacity); 1375 (adopting "that regular capacity''), distinct (ALJ characterized task "consider[ing] conditions''). latter surprising, governing approving declines.

Category: 7