From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Peter v. Arrien

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
May 12, 1972
463 F.2d 252 (3d Cir. 1972)

Opinion

No. 71-1529.

Argued April 11, 1972.

Decided May 12, 1972. As Amended July 26, 1972.

Laurence Reich, Carpenter, Bennett Morrissey, Newark, N. J., for appellant.

Milton M. Borowsky, Freedman, Borowsky Lorry, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

Before HASTIE, VAN DUSEN and ALDISERT, Circuit Judges.


OPINION OF THE COURT


The district court held that the widow and dependent children of Ralph Peter were entitled to compensation for his death under the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C. § 901. This appeal challenges that decision.

Peter was employed by a contractor engaged in the demolition of a bridge over navigable water of the Delaware River. He drowned when a crane he was operating on a temporary causeway, built for the purposes of this project from the shore out into the stream, toppled into the river.

For reasons stated in the opinion of the district court, 325 F. Supp. 1361, we are satisfied that the circumstances of Peter's employment and death bring the present claim within the coverage of the Longshoremen's Act and that, in the circumstances of this case, the acceptance of payments under a state compensation statute did not preclude recovery under the federal statute.

Recovery was limited to the amount by which benefits under the federal statute exceed those allowed under the state statute.

The judgment will be affirmed.


Summaries of

Peter v. Arrien

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
May 12, 1972
463 F.2d 252 (3d Cir. 1972)
Case details for

Peter v. Arrien

Case Details

Full title:MARGARET KISTLER PETER ET AL. v. PHILLIP F. ARRIEN, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: May 12, 1972

Citations

463 F.2d 252 (3d Cir. 1972)

Citing Cases

Dir., Off. of Wkrs'. Comp., v. Nat. Van Lines

Since the Virginia statute does not preclude an additional award under the District of Columbia law, the…

United Brands Co. v. Melson

We feel compelled, however, to inquire further to determine if any overriding policy requires that Melson's…