Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Hansen v. Caldwell Diving Co, 00-1443 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-1443 Visitors: 10
Filed: Feb. 13, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1443 ERIC C. HANSEN, Petitioner, versus CALDWELL DIVING COMPANY, INCORPORATED; EM- PLOYER’S INSURANCE OF WAUSAU; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Division of Longshore Harbors Workers; BENEFITS REVIEW BOARD, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (BRB-98-1596) Submitted: February 8, 2001 Decided: February 13, 2001 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER,
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1443 ERIC C. HANSEN, Petitioner, versus CALDWELL DIVING COMPANY, INCORPORATED; EM- PLOYER’S INSURANCE OF WAUSAU; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Division of Longshore Harbors Workers; BENEFITS REVIEW BOARD, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (BRB-98-1596) Submitted: February 8, 2001 Decided: February 13, 2001 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Eric C. Hansen, Petitioner Pro Se. Stephen Edward Darling, SINKLER & BOYD, P.A., Charleston, South Carolina; Laura Jessica Stomski, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, Washington, D.C., for Respondents. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Eric C. Hansen seeks review of the Benefits Review Board’s decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s denial of benefits pursuant to the Longshore & Harbor Workers’ Compensa- tion Act. 33 U.S.C.A. §§ 901-950 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000). Hansen also appeals the Board’s order denying his motion for reconsid- eration. Our review of the record discloses that the Board’s deci- sions are based upon substantial evidence and are without revers- ible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Hansen v. Caldwell Diving Co., Inc., No. BRB-98-1596 (Sept. 7, 1999 & Feb. 23, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer