Jones Stevedoring Co. v. Steven Popovich
705 F. App'x 608
| 9th Cir. | 2017Background
- Steven Popovich, a longshore worker for Jones Stevedoring, suffered a severe shoulder injury on the job and was found permanently and totally disabled (uncontested by Jones).
- Jones Stevedoring sought relief under 33 U.S.C. § 908(f) (shifted liability for long-term disability to the Special Fund).
- The ALJ denied § 8(f) relief; the Benefits Review Board (BRB) affirmed.
- Jones challenged the BRB’s denial on appeal to the Ninth Circuit, arguing Popovich’s disability was not solely due to the recent shoulder injury.
- The court reviewed whether substantial evidence supports the BRB/ALJ finding that the shoulder injury alone rendered Popovich permanently totally disabled, and that preexisting conditions only increased the disability rather than being its sole cause.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Jones) | Defendant's Argument (BRB/ALJ/Director) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entitlement to § 8(f) relief | Popovich’s current disability stems from preexisting conditions combined with the injury, so Jones should qualify for § 8(f) relief | The shoulder injury alone was sufficient to cause permanent total disability; preexisting conditions only increased the disability | Denied — substantial evidence supports that the recent injury alone caused the disability, so § 8(f) relief not available |
| Burden of proof on causation | Jones asserted other ailments materially contributed such that disability was not solely due to the recent injury | BRB/ALJ found Jones failed to prove the shoulder injury was not the sole cause of current disability | Court held Jones failed to meet § 8(f) standard; burden not satisfied |
| Relevance of degenerative shoulder changes | Jones argued preexisting degenerative changes contributed to disability | BRB/ALJ found degenerative changes were not manifest to employer at injury time and thus do not establish entitlement | Court noted degenerative changes existed but were not known to employer and therefore do not aid Jones’s § 8(f) claim |
| Deference to agency findings | Jones contended the BRB erred in applying law or weighing evidence | The court emphasized BRB must accept ALJ’s findings unless contrary to law or unsupported by substantial evidence | Court affirmed BRB/ALJ decisions as supported by substantial evidence and legally correct |
Key Cases Cited
- E.P. Paup Co. v. Dir., Office of Workers Comp. Programs, 999 F.2d 1341 (9th Cir. 1993) (standard for § 8(f) causation and burden)
- Fenske v. Serv. Emps. Int’l, Inc., 835 F.3d 978 (9th Cir. 2016) (deference to Director’s position)
- Price v. Stevedoring Servs. of Am., Inc., 697 F.3d 820 (9th Cir. 2012) (deference to Director’s position)
- FMC Corp. v. Dir., Office of Workers Comp. Programs, 886 F.2d 1185 (9th Cir. 1989) (preexisting conditions that only increase disability do not bar employer liability under § 8(f))
- Stevedoring Servs. of Am. v. Dir., Office of Workers’ Comp. Programs, 297 F.3d 797 (9th Cir. 2002) (BRB must accept ALJ findings unless contrary to law or unsupported)
- Bunge Corp. v. Dir., Office of Workers Comp., 951 F.2d 1109 (9th Cir. 1991) (preexisting condition knowledge to employer relevant to § 8(f) analysis)