Price v. Stevedoring Services of America, Inc.
697 F.3d 820
| 9th Cir. | 2012Background
- Price was injured in 1991 as a longshoreman; maximum weekly rate at injury was $699.96; informal payments began in 1992 with lump-sum and weekly benefits; formal ALJ award issued in 2000 after remand; 1991 fiscal-year maximum applied on remand; ALJ awarded interest at 28 U.S.C. § 1961 rate (simple) rather than § 6621; BRB affirmed; issue centered on maximum rate, interest rate, and whether interest should be simple or compound; Director urged Chevron deference to litigating positions but court overruled that deferring approach; Roberts v. Sea-Land held “newly awarded compensation” triggers rate applicability by when disabled, not when order issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 1961 or § 6621 governs past-due interest rate under LHWCA | Price urged § 6621 rate | Director urged § 1961 rate | § 1961 rate governs past-due interest |
| Whether interest on past-due awards should be compound | Price advocates compound interest | Director favored simple interest | Compound interest required; not limited to post-judgment context |
| Whether Chevron deference applies to the Director’s litigating position interpreting the Longshore Act | Director's position entitled to Chevron deference | Director's position not entitled to Chevron deference | Director’s litigating position not entitled to Chevron deference; no Chevron deference applied |
| Whether Roberts controls the maximum compensation rate for the initial disability period | Roberts controls when newly disabled | BRB/Respondents argued different interpretation | Roberts controls; use 1991 fiscal-year maximum rate for the disability period |
| Whether Skidmore deference applies to the Director’s rate interpretation given long-standing practice | Director's practice should be respected | Skidmore not determinative; Board reasonableness insufficient | Skidmore deference applied to rate interpretation; Board not entitled to Chevron; Director's long-standing practice persuasive |
Key Cases Cited
- Roberts v. Sea-Land Servs., Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1350 (2012) (newly awarded compensation triggers rate when disabled regardless of order timing)
- Newport News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. v. Dir., OWCP, 514 U.S. 122 (1995) (Director can resolve legal ambiguities; but not entitled to full Chevron deference)
- Mead Corp. v. Dept. of the Interior, 533 U.S. 218 (2001) (Mead limits Chevron deference; classification-like interpretations treated differently)
- Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243 (2006) (interpreting rules; interpretive rule not always entitled to deference when statute governs)
- Martin v. OSHRC, 499 U.S. 144 (1991) (OSHRC interpreted regulations; nonpolicymaking adjudicatory body; limited deference)
- Auer v. Robbins, 519 U.S. 452 (1997) (deference to agency interpretation of its own regulations when regulation provides guidance)