Westmoreland Coal Company v. Shirley Stallard


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 15-0374 BLA,15-0375 BLA Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000121927].. [16-2224]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-2224 Doc: 32 Filed: 07/20/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-2224 WESTMORELAND COAL COMPANY, Petitioner, v. SHIRLEY STALLARD, Widow and on behalf of Creed Stallard; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondents. On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (15-0374 BLA; 150375 BLA) Submitted: June 16, 2017 Decided: July 20, 2017 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, KING, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Paul E. Frampton, BOWLES RICE LLP, Charleston, West Virginia, for Petitioner. Joseph E. Wolfe, WOLFE WILLIAMS & REYNOLDS, Norton, Virginia; Barry H. Joyner, Gary K. Stearman, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C., for Respondents. Appeal: 16-2224 Doc: 32 Filed: 07/20/2017 Pg: 2 of 3 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 16-2224 Doc: 32 Filed: 07/20/2017 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: Westmoreland Coal Company seeks review of the Benefits Review Board’s decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s award of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C. §§ 901-944 (2012). Our review of the record discloses that the Board’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons stated by the Board. Westmoreland Coal Co. v. Stallard, Nos. 15-0374 BLA & 15-0375 BLA (B.R.B. Aug. 23, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. PETITION DENIED 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?