Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
- Rechtsrecherche mit Zugriff auf über 1 Million Quellen
- Dokumentenautomatisierung
- Mandatsverwaltung
- Gehostet in der EU und der Schweiz
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
Der KI-Arbeitsbereich für Juristen
14 Tage kostenlos testen (10 Fragen/Tag während der Testphase)
02-1732•Gussie Martin v. Clinchfield Coal Company
02-1732Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit16.10.2002
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-1732
GUSSIE MARTIN,
Petitioner,
versus
CLINCHFIELD COAL COMPANY; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
Respondents.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board.
(01-644-BLA)
Submitted: October 10, 2002 Decided: October 16, 2002
Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gussie Martin, Petitioner Pro Se. Timothy Ward Gresham, PENN,
STUART & ESKRIDGE, Abingdon, Virginia; Christian P. Barber, Timothy
S. Williams, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C.,
for Respondents.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
-- 1 of 2 --
2
PER CURIAM:
Gussie Martin seeks review of the Benefits Review Board’s
decision and order affirming the administrative law judge’s denial
of black lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C. §§ 901-945 (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 on the reasoning of the Board. See Martin
v. Clinchfield Coal Co., No. 01-644-BLA (BRB June 10, 2002). 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 of 2 --
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.