a belief that the one chosen by the Deputy Commissioner is factually questionable.'
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has held that doubts should be resolved in favor of the employee. Robinson v. Bradshaw, 92 U.S.App.D.C. 216, 206 F.,2d 435 (1953); cert. denied 346 U.S. 899, 74 S. Ct. 226, 98 L. Ed. 400.
In Todd Shipyards Corp. v. Donovan, 300 F.2d 741, 742 (5th Cir., 1962), the court held that it is the responsibility of the Deputy Commissioner 'to select the more reasonable inference in the light of the evidence as a whole and the 'common sense of the situation." Citing Avignone Freres, Inc. v. Cardillo, 73 U.S.App.D.C. 149, 117 F.2d 385 (1940).
Clearly, the Deputy Commissioner was required to draw inferences due to the nature of the injury. These inferences are supported by the facts and are consistent with 'the common sense of the situation.' Although other inferences could have been drawn, they were not, and this court will not disturb the findings of the Deputy Commissioner.
It is true, the claimant did not file a written claim until June 4, 1962, more than one year after the injury on April 22, 1961. However, she did inform the Compensation Bureau of the injury on May 12, 1961. The employer was notified on May 15, 1961, but did not file his report of the injury until June 16, 1961.
Section 930(f), Title 33 U.S.Code, tolls the one-year statute of limitations of Section 913. Section 930(f) states:
'* * * Where the employer or the carrier has been given notice, or the employer * * * has knowledge, of any injury * * * and fails, neglects, or refuses to file report thereof as required by the provisions of subdivision (a) of this section, the limitations in subdivision (a) of section 913 of this title shall not begin to run against the claim of the injured employee * * * until such report shall have been furnished as required * * *.'
The employee filed her claim on June 4, 1962, just prior to the expiration of the one-year limitation, which did not begin until the employer's report was filed on June 16, 1961.
Therefore, in accordance with the foregoing, it is this 8th day on June, 1964,
Ordered, that plaintiff's motion for summary judgment be, and the same hereby is, denied; and
Ordered, that defendant's motion for summary judgment be, and the same hereby is, granted; and it is further
Ordered, that the interlocutory injunction entered on December 24, 1963, staying payments of the accrued sum to the claimant, be and the same hereby is dissolved.
Counsel for defendant will submit findings of fact and conclusions of law.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.