U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1961

National Union Fire Insurance v. Britton

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided March 23, 1961

289 F.2d 454; 110 U.S. App. D.C. 77 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. John Flather Ellis, Washington, D. C., for appellants., Mr. Herbert P. Miller, Asst. Sol., Department of Labor, with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty., and Carl W. Belcher, Asst. U. S. Atty., were on the brief, for appellee Britton., Mr. Saul M. Schwartzbach, Washington, D. C., for appellees Morton.

Cases that cite this one

4 later published cases cite this decision.

Coates v. Watts (D.C. 1993)
Alphonso Marcus v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, U. S. Department of Labor (D.C. Cir. 1976)
National Union Fire Insurance Company Of Pittsburgh v. Theodore Britton (D.C. Cir. 1961)
Johnson v. Young (D.C. 1977)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Appellant asked the District Court to review and set aside a compensation order awarding death benefits to the widow and minor children of an employee who sustained a fatal injury. The Commissioner had found, inter alia, that after an argument arising in the course of decedent’s employment in the employer’s place of business between the employer’s customer and the employee, a “gunshot wound suffered by the employee was willfully inflicted upon him by the employer’s customer because of his employment.” 1 The District Judge in granting summary judgment for the Commissioner has dealt adequately with this aspect of the case. National Union Fire Ins. Co. v. Britton, D.C.D.C.1960, 187 F.Supp. 359. It has further been argued before us that the Commissioner could not properly have found that a valid marital relationship had been established between the deceased employee and the claimant widow, and therefore the District Court had erred in sustaining the awards.

We are. satisfied that the findings do not lack support by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole.

Affirmed.

. Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C.A. § 902 provides that the term “injury” as used in the Act “includes an injury caused by the willful act of a third person directed against an employee because of his employment.”

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.