Opinion ID: 1960793
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: manifest requirement

Text: To implement this narrow purpose, the federal courts imposed a requirement not found in the text of the Longshoremen's Act. An employer seeking relief must prove that the employee's previous disability was manifest to the employer. American Mut. Ins. Co. of Boston v. Jones, 138 U.S.App. D.C. 269, 273-74, 426 F.2d 1263, 1267-68 (1970). If a previous disability is not manifest, an employer would have ... no reason to discriminate against the handicapped person, C & P Tel. Co. v. Dir., Office of Workers' Comp. Programs, 184 U.S.App. D.C. 18, 29 n. 10, 564 F.2d 503, 514 n. 10 (1977), and any relief to the employer would amount to a windfall, American Mut., supra, 138 U.S.App. D.C. at 273, 426 F.2d at 1267. The manifest requirement of the federal statute has been incorporated into the local statute that replaced it. Driggs, supra, 632 A.2d at 745. Accordingly, this court has noted that eligibility for special fund relief is based on whether the employee's pre-existing disability was manifest to the employer at any time prior to the compensable injury. WMATA, supra, 704 A.2d at 298. A previous disability or physical impairment is manifest to an employer when the condition puts the employer on notice of greatly increased liability and thus creates a risk of discrimination. Id. at 299 (citing Berkstresser, supra, 287 U.S.App. D.C. at 270, 921 F.2d at 310). On behalf of the special fund, DOES argues that an employer is put on notice only if it has actual knowledge of the previous condition. Mergentime Perini counters that, although actual knowledge is sufficient to satisfy the manifest requirement, proof of such knowledge is not necessary; according to petitioners, the mere existence of medical records, without more, is enough to put an employer on notice.