Calderon v. Tobin, Secretary of Labor

D.C. Circuit

Calderon v. Tobin, Secretary of Labor

187 F.2d 514, 88 U.S. App. D.C. 134, 1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 2274

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedJanuary 4, 1951

Docket10151_1

StatusPublished

Cited by14 cases

This text of 187 F.2d 514 (Calderon v. Tobin, Secretary of Labor) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Calderon v. Tobin, Secretary of Labor, 187 F.2d 514, 88 U.S. App. D.C. 134, 1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 2274 (D.C. Cir. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

PRETTYMAN, Circuit Judge.

Maximo Calderon, being then an employee of the United States, died as the result of injuries sustained in the course of that employment. The Surrogate’s Court of the County of New York, after litigation, issued letters of administration to Aurea Calderon and refused to revoke those letters upon the petition of Adela Calderon. Thereafter Aurea, Adela and Celia Calderon were claimants before the Bureau of Employees’ Compensation of the Federal Security Agency for compensation as the widow of the deceased. The Director of the Bureau and the Appeals Board held Celia Calderon to be the widow within the meaning of the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act, 5 U.S.C.A. § 751 et seq. This suit followed.

It appears that the deceased had a succession of wives, at least one of whom, iate in the succession, was ceremonially married to him, and none of these relationships was formally dissolved. The federal Board selected the first in chronological order. It might be observed, although it is of no importance to the decision in this case, that she was not a party to the New York surrogate proceeding.

The Federal Compensation Act, as amended, 1 provides: “The action of the Administrator or his designees in allowing o>r denying any payment under sections 751-791 and 793 of this title shall be final and conclusive for all purposes and with respect to all questions of law and fact, and not subject to review by any other official of the United States, or by any court by mandamus or otherwise, and credit shall be allowed in the accounts of any *516 certifying or disbursing officer for payments in accordance with such action.”

The federal employees’ compensation allowances are grants by the Congress, and the agents of the Congress have power to determine the recipients of such grants. If Congress chose to preclude judicial review of the selection of the objects of its bounty, it could do so. 2 The full faith and credit clause of the Constitution is not involved.

We are in agreement with the District Court, and its judgment is, therefore, affirmed.

1

. 5 U.S.C.A. § 793.

2

. Cf. 38 U.S.C.A. § 705; Barnett v. Hines, 1939, 70 App.D.C. 217, 105 F.2d 96, certiorari denied, 1939, 308 U.S. 573, 60 S.Ct. 88, 84 L.Ed. 480; Van Horne v. Hines, 1941, 74 App.D.C. 214, 122 F.2d 207, certiorari denied, 1941, 314 U.S. 689, 62 S.Ct. 360, 86 L.Ed. 552.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PRETTYMAN, Circuit Judge.

Maximo Calderon, being then an employee of the United States, died as the result of injuries sustained in the course of that employment. The Surrogate’s Court of the County of New York, after litigation, issued letters of administration to Aurea Calderon and refused to revoke those letters upon the petition of Adela Calderon. Thereafter Aurea, Adela and Celia Calderon were claimants before the Bureau of Employees’ Compensation of the Federal Security Agency for compensation as the widow of the deceased. The Director of the Bureau and the Appeals Board held Celia Calderon to be the widow within the meaning of the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act, 5 U.S.C.A. § 751 et seq. This suit followed.

It appears that the deceased had a succession of wives, at least one of whom, iate in the succession, was ceremonially married to him, and none of these relationships was formally dissolved. The federal Board selected the first in chronological order. It might be observed, although it is of no importance to the decision in this case, that she was not a party to the New York surrogate proceeding.

The Federal Compensation Act, as amended, 1 provides: “The action of the Administrator or his designees in allowing o>r denying any payment under sections 751-791 and 793 of this title shall be final and conclusive for all purposes and with respect to all questions of law and fact, and not subject to review by any other official of the United States, or by any court by mandamus or otherwise, and credit shall be allowed in the accounts of any *516 certifying or disbursing officer for payments in accordance with such action.”

The federal employees’ compensation allowances are grants by the Congress, and the agents of the Congress have power to determine the recipients of such grants. If Congress chose to preclude judicial review of the selection of the objects of its bounty, it could do so. 2 The full faith and credit clause of the Constitution is not involved.

We are in agreement with the District Court, and its judgment is, therefore, affirmed.

1

. 5 U.S.C.A. § 793.

2

. Cf. 38 U.S.C.A. § 705; Barnett v. Hines, 1939, 70 App.D.C. 217, 105 F.2d 96, certiorari denied, 1939, 308 U.S. 573, 60 S.Ct. 88, 84 L.Ed. 480; Van Horne v. Hines, 1941, 74 App.D.C. 214, 122 F.2d 207, certiorari denied, 1941, 314 U.S. 689, 62 S.Ct. 360, 86 L.Ed. 552.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

187 F.2d 514, 88 U.S. App. D.C. 134, 1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 2274, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/calderon-v-tobin-secretary-of-labor-cadc-1951.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack