Nicklos Drilling Co. v. Cowart, No. 89-4944
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | Before GEE, DAVIS, and JONES; PER CURIAM |
| Citation | 907 F.2d 1552 |
| Parties | NICKLOS DRILLING COMPANY and Compass Insurance Company, Petitioners, v. Floyd COWART and Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, U.S. Department of Labor, Respondents. Summary Calendar. |
| Decision Date | 09 August 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. 89-4944 |
Page 1552
v.
Floyd COWART and Director, Office of Workers' Compensation
Programs, U.S. Department of Labor, Respondents.
Summary Calendar.
Fifth Circuit.
H. Lee Lewis, Jr., Griggs & Harrison, Houston, Tex., for petitioners.
Lloyd N. Frischhertz, Seelig, Cosse', Frischhertz & Poulliard, New Orleans, La., for Floyd Cowart.
Joshua T. Gillelan, II, Samuel J. Oshinsky, Solicitors, U.S. Dept. of Labor, Washington, D.C., for Director, Office of Workers Comp. Programs.
Linda Meekins, Clerk, Benefit Review Bd., U.S. Dept. of Labor, Washington, D.C., for other interested parties.
Petition for Review of a Decision and Order of The Benefits Review Board, U.S. Department of Labor.
Before GEE, DAVIS, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Today we reverse a decision of the Benefits Review Board as contrary to the unambiguous language of the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA) and to what we had thought was the clear mandate of this Court. Because the Benefits Review Board (BRB) has refused to heed Congress's and our earlier pronouncements, we write somewhat at length to make our position clear beyond peradventure. We have in the past consistently held, and we now reaffirm, that future LHWCA benefits must be denied an employee who fails to obtain prior consent by his employer/carrier to the settlement of his claim against a third party tortfeasor. There are no exceptions to this rule: Congress enacted none, we engraft none, and we will tolerate the engraftment of none by the BRB in cases within our appellate jurisdiction.
Facts and Prior Proceedings
Floyd Cowart was injured on July 20, 1983, on a Nicklos Drilling Company drilling rig. The rig was on a fixed offshore
Page 1553
platform being operated by Transco Exploration Company. Mr. Cowart made a claim against Nicklos and its carrier for benefits under the LHWCA and filed suit against Transco in Federal District Court, seeking compensation for his injury. The carrier paid Cowart benefits for temporary total disability until May 21, 1984, when he was released to return to work. On July 1, 1985, without the written approval of Nicklos or its carrier, Cowart settled his third-party claim against Transco for a lump sum payment of $45,000.Thereafter, Cowart filed this claim against Nicklos and its carrier seeking additional LHWCA...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Estate of Cowart v. Nicklos Drilling Company, No. 91-17
...in reliance on Dorsey. 23 BRBS 42 (1989) (per curiam ). On review, a panel of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed. 907 F.2d 1552 (1990). Without addressing the Board's specific statutory interpretation, it held that § 33(g) contains no exceptions to its written-approval requ......
-
Ingalls Shipbuilding, Inc. v. Asbestos Health Claimants, No. 93-7077
...obtaining Ingalls' formal, written approval. This action by Ingalls was prompted by our opinion in Nicklos Drilling Co. v. Cowart, 907 F.2d 1552 (5th Cir.1990). In Cowart, a panel of this Court held that, pursuant to 33 U.S.C. Sec. 933(g)(1), failure of a claimant to obtain the approval of ......
-
Lewis v. Todd Pacific Shipyards Corp., BRB 93-0661
...regardless of whether the employer or its carrier is paying benefits at the time of the settlement. See Nicklos Drilling Co. v. Cowart, 907 F.2d 1552, 24 BRBS 1 (CRT) (5th Cir. 1990), aff'd on recon. en banc, 927 F.2d 828, 24 BRBS 93 (CRT) (5th Cir. 1991). The United States Supreme Court ha......
-
Liberty Ins. Corp. v. SM Energy, CIVIL ACTION NO. H-12-3092
...to offset); see also Kelly v. Red Fox Cos. of New Iberia, Inc., 123 F. App'x 595 (5thPage 4Cir. 2005); Nicklos Drilling Co. v. Cowart, 907 F.2d 1552 (5th Cir. 1990); Jackson v. Land & Offshore Services, Inc., 855 F.2d 244 (5th Cir. 1988); Petroleum Helicopters, Inc. v. Collier, 784 F.2d......
-
Estate of Cowart v. Nicklos Drilling Company, No. 91-17
...in reliance on Dorsey. 23 BRBS 42 (1989) (per curiam ). On review, a panel of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed. 907 F.2d 1552 (1990). Without addressing the Board's specific statutory interpretation, it held that § 33(g) contains no exceptions to its written-approval requ......
-
Ingalls Shipbuilding, Inc. v. Asbestos Health Claimants, No. 93-7077
...obtaining Ingalls' formal, written approval. This action by Ingalls was prompted by our opinion in Nicklos Drilling Co. v. Cowart, 907 F.2d 1552 (5th Cir.1990). In Cowart, a panel of this Court held that, pursuant to 33 U.S.C. Sec. 933(g)(1), failure of a claimant to obtain the approval of ......
-
Lewis v. Todd Pacific Shipyards Corp., BRB 93-0661
...regardless of whether the employer or its carrier is paying benefits at the time of the settlement. See Nicklos Drilling Co. v. Cowart, 907 F.2d 1552, 24 BRBS 1 (CRT) (5th Cir. 1990), aff'd on recon. en banc, 927 F.2d 828, 24 BRBS 93 (CRT) (5th Cir. 1991). The United States Supreme Court ha......
-
Liberty Ins. Corp. v. SM Energy, CIVIL ACTION NO. H-12-3092
...to offset); see also Kelly v. Red Fox Cos. of New Iberia, Inc., 123 F. App'x 595 (5thPage 4Cir. 2005); Nicklos Drilling Co. v. Cowart, 907 F.2d 1552 (5th Cir. 1990); Jackson v. Land & Offshore Services, Inc., 855 F.2d 244 (5th Cir. 1988); Petroleum Helicopters, Inc. v. Collier, 784 F.2d......