Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • McElroy Coal Company v. DOWCP, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    This unpublished opinion by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denies McElroy Coal Company's petition for review of the Benefits Review Board's decision awarding living miner benefits to Roger D. Kennedy under the Black Lung Benefits Act. The court found that the administrative law judge's decision was based on substantial evidence and that the Board's decision contained no reversible error. The court denied the petition without oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials before the court.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2015-12-11 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 15-1322

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This unpublished opinion by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denies McElroy Coal Company's petition for review of the Benefits Review Board's decision awarding living miner benefits to Roger D. Kennedy under the Black Lung Benefits Act. The court found that the administrative law judge's decision was based on substantial evidence and that the Board's decision contained no reversible error. The court denied the petition without oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials before the court.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    6 views2 pages

    McElroy Coal Company v. DOWCP, 4th Cir. (2015)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This unpublished opinion by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denies McElroy Coal Company's petition for review of the Benefits Review Board's decision awarding living miner benefits to Roger D. Kennedy under the Black Lung Benefits Act. The court found that the administrative law judge's decision was based on substantial evidence and that the Board's decision contained no reversible error. The court denied the petition without oral argument, finding the facts and legal issues were adequately presented in the materials before the court.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 15-1322

    MCELROY COAL COMPANY,


    Petitioner,
    v.
    DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED
    STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; ROGER D. KENNEDY,
    Respondents.

    On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board.


    (13-0592 BLA)

    Submitted:

    November 30, 2015

    Decided:

    December 11, 2015

    Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

    Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Jeffrey R. Soukup, Kevin M. McGuire, Williams S. Mattingly,


    JACKSON KELLY PLLC, Lexington, Kentucky, for Petitioner.
    M.
    Patricia Smith, Solicitor of Labor, Rae Ellen James, Associate
    Solicitor, Gary K. Stearman, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
    Washington, D.C.; Anne Megan Davis, Thomas E. Johnson, JOHNSON,
    JONES, SNELLING, GILBERT & DAVIS, P.C., Chicago, Illinois, for
    Respondents.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    McElroy Coal Company seeks review of the Benefits Review
    Boards

    decision

    and

    order

    affirming

    the

    administrative

    law

    judges award of living miner benefits to former miner Roger D.


    Kennedy,

    pursuant

    to

    30

    U.S.C.

    901-945

    subsequent order denying reconsideration.


    record

    discloses

    that

    the

    ALJs

    (2012)

    and

    its

    Our review of the

    decision

    is

    based

    upon

    substantial evidence and that the Boards decision is without


    reversible error.

    Accordingly, we deny the petition for review.

    We

    oral

    dispense

    contentions

    with
    are

    argument

    adequately

    because

    presented

    in

    the

    facts

    and

    the

    materials

    legal
    before

    this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    PETITION DENIED

    You might also like