Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Mathis v. Island Creek Coal Co, 01-2380 (2002)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 01-2380 Visitors: 15
Filed: May 29, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2380 LONNIE MATHIS, JR., Petitioner, versus ISLAND CREEK COAL COMPANY; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (01-210-BLA) Submitted: April 22, 2002 Decided: May 29, 2002 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Roger D. Forman, FORMAN & CRANE
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-2380 LONNIE MATHIS, JR., Petitioner, versus ISLAND CREEK COAL COMPANY; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (01-210-BLA) Submitted: April 22, 2002 Decided: May 29, 2002 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Roger D. Forman, FORMAN & CRANE, L.C., Charleston, West Virginia, for Petitioner. William S. Mattingly, Ashley M. Harman, JACKSON & KELLY, P.L.L.C., Morgantown, West Virginia, for Respondents. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Lonnie Mathis, Jr., seeks review of the Benefits Review Board’s decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s denial of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C.A. §§ 901-945 (West 1986 & Supp. 2001). Our review of the record discloses that the Board’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. See Mathis v. Island Creek Coal Co., No. 01-210-BLA (BRB Oct. 30, 2001). 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