Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Hogan v. DOWCP, 97-1187 (1997)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 97-1187 Visitors: 29
Filed: Dec. 29, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-1187 SIDNEY H. HOGAN, Petitioner, versus DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; EASTERN ASSOCIATED COAL CORPORATION, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (95-2157-BLA) Submitted: October 31, 1997 Decided: December 29, 1997 Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curia
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 97-1187 SIDNEY H. HOGAN, Petitioner, versus DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; EASTERN ASSOCIATED COAL CORPORATION, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (95-2157-BLA) Submitted: October 31, 1997 Decided: December 29, 1997 Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert S. Baker, Beckley, West Virginia, for Petitioner. J. Davitt McAteer, Acting Solicitor of Labor, Donald S. Shire, Associate Solicitor, Patricia M. Nece, Counsel for Appellate Litigation, Rita Roppolo, Office of the Solicitor, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C.; Mark E. Solomons, Laura Metcoff Klaus, ARTER & HADDEN, Washington, D.C., for Respondents. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks review of the Benefits Review Board's deci- sions and orders affirming the administrative law judge's denial of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C.A. ยงยง 901-945 (West 1986 & Supp. 1997). Our review of the record discloses that the Board's decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without revers- ible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Hogan v. Eastern Coal Corp., Nos. 90-1108; 95-2157-BLA (B.R.B. June 17, 1994; Dec. 11, 1996). We have reviewed the remaining con- tentions and find them to be without merit. 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