Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Isaac York v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, 867 F.2d 610, 4th Cir. (1989)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1 views2 pages
    The court granted the Director's motion to remand a case back to the Benefits Review Board for further consideration. The petitioner sought black lung benefits but was denied by an ALJ and the BRB. The Director argued the ALJ did not properly consider evidence that could have established the petitioner's invocation of a presumption of disability under 20 C.F.R. § 727.203(a)(3). The court agreed the BRB should review the ALJ's analysis of this potentially invoking evidence. The court also instructed the BRB to review the ALJ's consideration of evidence under § 727.203(a)(4) and, if invocation is established, to review the ALJ's rebuttal findings under §

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1989-01-12 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 867 F.2d 610 Docket: 88-2885

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The court granted the Director's motion to remand a case back to the Benefits Review Board for further consideration. The petitioner sought black lung benefits but was denied by an ALJ and the BRB. The Director argued the ALJ did not properly consider evidence that could have established the petitioner's invocation of a presumption of disability under 20 C.F.R. § 727.203(a)(3). The court agreed the BRB should review the ALJ's analysis of this potentially invoking evidence. The court also instructed the BRB to review the ALJ's consideration of evidence under § 727.203(a)(4) and, if invocation is established, to review the ALJ's rebuttal findings under §

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    1 views2 pages

    Isaac York v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, 867 F.2d 610, 4th Cir. (1989)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The court granted the Director's motion to remand a case back to the Benefits Review Board for further consideration. The petitioner sought black lung benefits but was denied by an ALJ and the BRB. The Director argued the ALJ did not properly consider evidence that could have established the petitioner's invocation of a presumption of disability under 20 C.F.R. § 727.203(a)(3). The court agreed the BRB should review the ALJ's analysis of this potentially invoking evidence. The court also instructed the BRB to review the ALJ's consideration of evidence under § 727.203(a)(4) and, if invocation is established, to review the ALJ's rebuttal findings under §

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    867 F.

    2d 610
    Unpublished Disposition

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of


    unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    Isaac YORK, Petitioner,
    v.
    DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION
    PROGRAMS, Respondent.
    No. 88-2885.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted: Dec. 16, 1988.
    Decided: Jan. 12, 1989.

    Isaac York, petitioner pro se.


    Marta Kusic, Michael J. Denney (United States Department of Labor), for
    respondent.
    Before ERVIN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    PER CURIAM:

    Isaac York sought benefits under Title IV of the Federal Coal Mine Health and
    Safety Act of 1969, as amended, 30 U.S.C. Sec. 901 et seq. (the Act) on the
    basis that he was totally disabled due to pneumoconiosis. An administrative law
    judge (ALJ) denied benefits, and the Benefits Review Board (Board) affirmed.
    York seeks review of the Board's order.

    The Director has filed a motion to remand the case to the Board for review of
    the ALJ's discrediting of evidence that could have supported invocation under
    20 C.F.R. Sec. 727.203(a)(3). See Mullins v. Director, OWCP, 56 U.S.L.W.

    4044 (U.S. Dec. 14, 1987) (No. 86-327). We agree that the Board should have
    considered the ALJ's analysis of the potentially invoking evidence pursuant to
    Sec. 727.203(a)(3), and also hold that on remand the Board should consider
    whether the ALJ's treatment of the potentially invoking evidence pursuant to
    Sec. 727.203(a)(4) is supported by substantial evidence. If on remand, the
    Board finds that invocation was established under Sec. 727.203(a), it must
    consider whether the ALJ's finding of rebuttal under Sec. 727.203(b)(2), (b)(3),
    and (b)(4), is supported by substantial evidence, and is in accordance with law.
    3

    Accordingly, the motion to remand is granted and the case is remanded to the
    Board for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

    REMANDED.

    You might also like