Bolin

Bolin v. Marshall

Good Law
76 F.2d 668·1935 A.M.C. 917·1935 U.S. App. LEXIS 2640
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 8, 1935No. 7439California793 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Wilbur, J.

The petitioner applied to respondent for relief under the Longshoremen’s and Har *669 bor Workers’ Compensation Act, 33 USCA §§ 901-950, because of the death of Eric Bolin, a longshoreman. It is admitted that if the petitioner had been the wife and were now the widow of the deceased she would be entitled to compensation under that act. The appellee denied relief upon the ground that appellant was not the widow of the deceased employee of the Portland Stevedor-ing Company. It was stipulated at the hearing before appellee, as Deputy Commissioner, that “both plaintiff [Mary Bolin] and said Eric Bolin were in all respects competent to marry on the said first day of July, 1931, and had entered into a common law marriage, as said term is understood in the general jurisprudence of the United States, save and except the said stevedoring company denied that said common law marriage was valid in the state of Oregon.” The Deputy Commissioner having denied relief, appellant filed a petition in the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of Oregon praying for prohibitory and mandatory injunction suspending the operation of the .Deputy Commissioner’s order and directing…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.