Paramino Lumber Co. v. Marshall, 309 U.S. 370 (1940)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Paramino Lumber Co. v. Marshall, 309 U.S. 370 (1940)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 309 U.S. 350, click here.
Paramino Lumber Co. v. Marshall No. 271 Argued January 30, 1940 Decided March 11, 1940 309 U.S. 370
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
Syllabus
1. A private Act of Congress which, after an award of compensation for disability made by a deputy commissioner under the Longshoremen’s & Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act had become final by expiration of the time for review, authorized and directed the Employees’ Compensation Commission to review the order and issue a new one, whereupon there was awarded additional compensation for disability continuing beyond the date as of which by the prior order it was deemed to have terminated, held, as to the employer and insurance carrier, not violative of the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment. Pp. 374, 378.
2. The Act was validly enacted by Congress to cure a defect in administration developed in the handling of a claim compensable under the Longshoremen’s & Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act. P. 379.
3. The enactment by Congress of private Acts, except bills of attainder and grants of nobility, is not forbidden by the Federal Constitution. P. 380.
4. The contention that the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment should be read into the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment, and that the Act denies equal protection, is rejected. Pp. 379-380.
5. The Act is not invalid as an encroachment by Congress on the judicial function. P. 381.
27 F.Supp. 823 affirmed.
Appeal from a decree of a District Court of three judges upholding the constitutionality of a special Act of Congress and dismissing libels in two cases consolidated for hearing.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Paramino Lumber Co. v. Marshall, 309 U.S. 370 (1940) in 309 U.S. 370 309 U.S. 371–309 U.S. 374. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=6PU4C2A58LXIQVJ.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Paramino Lumber Co. v. Marshall, 309 U.S. 370 (1940), in 309 U.S. 370, pp. 309 U.S. 371–309 U.S. 374. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=6PU4C2A58LXIQVJ.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Paramino Lumber Co. v. Marshall, 309 U.S. 370 (1940). cited in 1940, 309 U.S. 370, pp.309 U.S. 371–309 U.S. 374. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=6PU4C2A58LXIQVJ.
|