Case Name: CONTRACTORS, PACIFIC NAVAL AIR BASES, et al. v. MARSHALL, Deputy Com'r of U. S. Employees Compensation Commission, et al.
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1945-09-13
Citations: 151 F.2d 1008
Docket Number: No. 10992
Parties: CONTRACTORS, PACIFIC NAVAL AIR BASES, et al. v. MARSHALL, Deputy Com’r of U. S. Employees Compensation Commission, et al.
Judges: Before DENMAN, STEPHENS, and BONE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 151
Pages: 1008–1008

Head Matter:
CONTRACTORS, PACIFIC NAVAL AIR BASES, et al. v. MARSHALL, Deputy Com’r of U. S. Employees Compensation Commission, et al.
No. 10992.
Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Sept. 13, 1945.
Eggerman, Rosling & Williams, D. G. Eggerman, Edw. L. Rosling, DeWitt Williams, and Joseph J. Lanza, all of Seattle, Wash, for appellants.
J. Charles Dennis, U. S. Atty., and Herbert O’Hare, Asst. U. S. Atty., both of Seattle, Wash., and Leavenworth Colby, Atty., Dept, of Justice, of Washington, D. C. (Ward E. Boote, Chief Counsel, U. S. Employees’ Comp. Com., of Washington, D. C, and Herbert P. Miller, Asst. Chief Counsel, of New York City, of counsel), for appellee Wm. A. Marshall.
Koenigsberg & Sanford, of Seattle, Wash., for appellee Haddon.
Before DENMAN, STEPHENS, and BONE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the district court dismissing a complaint seeking to enjoin the enforcement of the award of the appellee deputy commissioner of the United States Compensation Commission to one Tex Haddon of compensation for a disability from an injury to Haddon while employed as a plumber by the appellant contractors engaged in construction of a military base on Oahu, Hawaiian Islands.
The appellants appeal on the ground that the award was "not in accordance with law," 33 U.S.C.A. § 921(b), and the question of law urged by appellants is that there is no substantial evidence to sustain the finding of the Commissioner that the injury to Haddon was one "arising out of and in the course of employment," 33 U.S.C.A. § 902(2). We are of the opinion that the district court was not in error in holding that there was substantial evidence to support the findings of the Commissioner. The judgment is affirmed.