Legal Document

358 U.S. 272 79 Supreme Court Reporter 266 3 United States Reports Lawyer’s Edition 2d Series KF101.8 U54 292 Harry Atlantic HAHN, Petitioner,v.ROSS ISLAND SAND & GRAVEL CO., a Corporation. Number 52. Argued Dec. 11, 1958. Decided Jan. 12, 1959. Rehearing Denied Feb. 24, See 359 921, 577. Mr. Dwight L. Schwab, Portland Or., for the petitioner. Ray or Haw. Hawai‘i KFH45 A2 Lafky, Salem, State of Oregon, as amicus curiae. Arno Denecke, Portland, respondent. PER CURIAM. 1 By its terms, Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act does not apply 'if recovery disability death through workmen's compensation proceedings may * validly be provided by law.' § 3, 44 Statutes-at-Large 1426, 33 Code KF62 903(a), Annotated KF65 U5 903(a) (emphasis supplied). In Davis versus Department Labor, 317 249, 63 225, 87 L.Ed. 246, we recognized that in some cases it was impossible to predict advance trial whether worker's injury occurred an operation which, although maritime nature, so 'local' allow state laws under limitations Southern Pacific company Jensen, 244 205, 37 524, 61 1086. As within this 'twilight zone,' Davis, effect, gave injured waterfront employee election recover either Workmen's Law which occurred. It seems plain enough petitioner's 'through proceedings,' could have been, fact was, 'provided law' Oregon Act. Ore.Rev.Stat. §§ 656.002 656.990. Therefore, did bar claim law. But since his employer had elected reject them, automatic provisions claim. Section 656.024 law provides, however, when has Act's maintain courts negligence action damages. Of course, do if case were then would provide exclusive remedy. Since is follows from what held nothing Constitution prevents recovery. 2 The judgment reversed cause remanded inconsistent with opinion. CHIEF JUSTICE Justice FRANKFURTER took no part consideration decision case. 4 STEWART, whom HARLAN joins, dissenting. 5 This poses difficult important issue first impression. decides it, N Immigration Nationality Decisions think, incorrectly. 6 petitioner while working on barge navigable waters Oregon. respondent secured payment Act, 901 et seq., but covered Law, seq. benefits federal statute clearly available at all times Instead accepting these benefits, he brought personal injuries court, permitting such against participating plan.1 7 court entered employer, notwithstanding jury award favor, affirmed Court, sole remedy statute. 214 Or. 1, 320 Reporter, 2nd 668. today reversed. 8 creation Labor zone' practical solution problem, problem stemming 1086, one 25 years post-Jensen history failed solve. how assure employees simple, prompt, certain protection Congress intended give enacting U.S., page 254, 228. effect told doubtful assured proceeded act Moores' Case, 323 Mass. 162, 80 North Eastern 478, per curiam, sub nom. Bethlehem Steel Moore, 335 874, 69 239, 93 417. 9 Even premise circumstances surrounding Hahn's accident twilight zone, supposed until allowed spurn submit jury.2 Chappell C. D. Johnson Lumber Corp., D.C., 112 F.Supp. 625, other grounds, Cir., 216 Federal 873. 10 interest clear legislative purpose certainty security compensation, 'illogic' zone permitted.3 Such illogic should utilized frustrate very purpose. affirm judgment. deprived traditional common-law defenses. 656.024. pertinent provision follows: '(a) shall payable chapter respect employee, only results occurring upon (including any dry dock) (Emphasis added.) background been much criticized discussed. For summaries, see Gilmore Black, Admiralty (1957), 6—48; Larson, (1952), 89.00 seq.; Rodes, Maritime Employees: Obscurity Twilight Zone, 68 Harv.L.Rev. 637 (1955).

Classification Label: 7