Harrow v. Britton
This text of 209 F.2d 303 (Harrow v. Britton) 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.
Opinion
This case concerns a claim for compensation under the District of Columbia Workmen’s Compensation Law. 1 Our present appellant filed a claim alleging that subsequent to July 15, 1946, she had suffered disability resulting from an injury incurred March 12, 1946. After hearing, the Deputy Commissioner made a finding of fact “that subsequent to July 9, 1946 the claimant has suffered no disability attributable to the injury of March 12, 1946”. We have examined the record as a whole and find ample evidence to support that finding. That is as far as our authority permits us to go. 2
Affirmed.
. Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 44 Stat. 1424 (1927), 33 U.S.C.A. § 901 et seq., as made applicable to the District of Columbia by Act of May 17, 1928, 45 Stat. 600, D.C. Code § 36-501 (1951), 33 U.S.C.A. § 901 note.
. O’Leary v. Brown-Pacific-Maxon, 1951, 340 U.S. 504, 71 S.Ct. 470, 95 L.Ed. 483.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
209 F.2d 303, 93 U.S. App. D.C. 128, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 3834, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harrow-v-britton-cadc-1953.