Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Mack v. Ceres Marine Terminals, 05-1201 (2005)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 05-1201 Visitors: 2
Filed: Jul. 27, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1201 AUGUSTINE MACK, JR., Petitioner, versus CERES MARINE TERMINALS; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (04-0471) Submitted: June 30, 2005 Decided: July 27, 2005 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bernard J. Sevel, ARNOLD, SEVEL & GA
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 05-1201 AUGUSTINE MACK, JR., Petitioner, versus CERES MARINE TERMINALS; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (04-0471) Submitted: June 30, 2005 Decided: July 27, 2005 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bernard J. Sevel, ARNOLD, SEVEL & GAY, P.A., Baltimore, Maryland, for Petitioner. Lawrence P. Postol, SEYFARTH SHAW LLP, Washington, D.C., for Respondent Ceres. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Augustine Mack, Jr., seeks review of the Benefits Review Board’s decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s award of longshore disability benefits pursuant to 33 U.S.C. §§ 901-950 (2000). Our review of the record discloses that the Board’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the Board. See Mack v. Ceres Marine Terminals, No. 04-0471 (BRB Jan. 31, 2005). 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