Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Cecelia J. Delong v. Office of Workers Compensation Program, 915 F.2d 1564, 4th Cir. (1990)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    2 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Cecelia J. Delong's action seeking reinstatement of compensation benefits under the Federal Employees Compensation Act. The Court of Appeals found that Section 8128(b) of the Act deprives it of jurisdiction over this matter, citing previous rulings. It also found that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case without a hearing since the jurisdictional facts were apparent from the record. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's reasoning and dispensed with oral argument.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1990-10-23 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 915 F.2d 1564 Docket: 90-1482

    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 United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Cecelia J. Delong's action seeking reinstatement of compensation benefits under the Federal Employees Compensation Act. The Court of Appeals found that Section 8128(b) of the Act deprives it of jurisdiction over this matter, citing previous rulings. It also found that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case without a hearing since the jurisdictional facts were apparent from the record. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's reasoning and dispensed with oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    Cecelia J. Delong v. Office of Workers Compensation Program, 915 F.2d 1564, 4th Cir. (1990)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court's dismissal of Cecelia J. Delong's action seeking reinstatement of compensation benefits under the Federal Employees Compensation Act. The Court of Appeals found that Section 8128(b) of the Act deprives it of jurisdiction over this matter, citing previous rulings. It also found that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case without a hearing since the jurisdictional facts were apparent from the record. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's reasoning and dispensed with oral argument.

    Copyright:

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

    915 F.

    2d 1564
    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.
    Cecelia J. DELONG, Plaintiff-Appellant,
    v.
    OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAM,
    Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 90-1482.

    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.


    Submitted Aug. 27, 1990.
    Decided Sept. 28, 1990.
    Rehearing and Rehearing In Banc Denied Oct. 23, 1990.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of
    Virginia, at Lynchburg. Jackson L. Kiser, District Judge. (CA-89-87-L)
    Cecelia J. Delong, appellant pro se.
    Ray Burton Fitzgerald, Jr., Office of the United States Attorney, Roanoke,
    Va., Larry F. Gottesman, United States Department of Labor, Washington,
    D.C., for appellee.
    W.D.Va.
    AFFIRMED.
    Before SPROUSE and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    PER CURIAM:

    Cecelia J. Delong appeals from the district court's order dismissing petitioner's
    action seeking reinstatement of compensation benefits under the Federal
    Employees Compensation Act. Our review of the record and the district court's
    opinion discloses that this appeal is without merit. Section 8128(b) of the Act
    deprives this Court of jurisdiction over this matter.* See Lindahl v. Office of
    Personnel Management, 470 U.S. 768 (1985); Wallace v. United States, 669
    F.2d 947 (4th Cir.1982). Moreover, the district court did not abuse its discretion
    by dismissing petitioner's case without a hearing, since the jurisdictional facts
    are apparent from the record. See Pettis ex rel. United States v. MorrisonKnudsen Co., 577 F.2d 668 (9th Cir.1978); Professional Construction
    Consultants v. Grimes, 552 F.Supp. 539 (W.D.Okla.1982). Accordingly, we
    affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Delong v. OWCP, CA-89-87-L
    (W.D.Va. May 8, 1990). 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.

    Petitioner's request for an increased rate of compensation should be addressed


    to the Office of Workers' Compensation Programs along with the information
    necessary to enable the Office to make a determination

    You might also like