Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Cline v. WV Dept of Energy, 96-1961 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 96-1961 Visitors: 25
Filed: Feb. 25, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1961 HERSEL CLINE, Petitioner, versus WEST VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY; PETER WHITE COAL COMPANY; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; WEST VIRGINIA COAL WORKERS' PNEUMOCONIOSIS FUND, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (94-3809-BLA) Submitted: February 13, 1997 Decided: February 25, 1997 Before WIDENER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-1961 HERSEL CLINE, Petitioner, versus WEST VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY; PETER WHITE COAL COMPANY; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; WEST VIRGINIA COAL WORKERS' PNEUMOCONIOSIS FUND, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (94-3809-BLA) Submitted: February 13, 1997 Decided: February 25, 1997 Before WIDENER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Hersel Cline, Petitioner Pro Se. Karen Nancy Blank, Patricia May Nece, C. William Mangum, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Wash- ington, D.C.; Elizabeth Ann Morgan, Assistant Attorney General, Konstantine Keian Weld, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia; Peter White Coal Company, Lexington, Kentucky, for Respondents. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). 2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks review of the Benefits Review Board's decision and order and order on reconsideration affirming the administrative law judge's denial of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C.A. ยงยง 901-945 (West 1986 & Supp. 1996). Our review of the record dis- closes that the Board's decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the rea- soning of the Board. Cline v. West Virginia Dep't of Energy, Nos. 94-3809-BLA; 94-3809-BLA-A (B.R.B. June 28, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate- ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3
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