Filed: Jun. 29, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1951 CARL C. THORN, Petitioner, versus ITMANN COAL COMPANY; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNTIED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondents. On petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (99-208-BLA) Argued: June 6, 2001 Decided: June 29, 2001 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Petition for review denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. ARGUED: S.F. Raymond Smith, R
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1951 CARL C. THORN, Petitioner, versus ITMANN COAL COMPANY; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNTIED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondents. On petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (99-208-BLA) Argued: June 6, 2001 Decided: June 29, 2001 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Petition for review denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. ARGUED: S.F. Raymond Smith, RU..
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-1951 CARL C. THORN, Petitioner, versus ITMANN COAL COMPANY; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNTIED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondents. On petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (99-208-BLA) Argued: June 6, 2001 Decided: June 29, 2001 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges. Petition for review denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. ARGUED: S.F. Raymond Smith, RUNDLE & RUNDLE, L.C., Pineville, West Virginia, for Petitioner. Kathy Lynn Snyder, JACKSON & KELLY, Morgantown, West Virginia, for Respondents. ON BRIEF: Mary Rich Maloy, JACKSON & KELLY, P.L.L.C., Charleston, West Virginia, for Respondent Itmann Coal. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Following oral argument and having considered the briefs and the record, we find no reversible error in the June 9, 2000, deci- sion of the Benefits Review Board, BRB No. 99-0208 BLA, affirming the administrative law judge’s October 29, 1998, decision and order on remand denying benefits. Accordingly, for the reasons substantially expressed in the opinion of the Benefits Review Board, the petition for review is DENIED. 2
