Emra E. Campbell v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor, Central Appalachian Coal Company
This text of 943 F.2d 48 (Emra E. Campbell v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor, Central Appalachian Coal Company) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Emra E. CAMPBELL, Petitioner,
v.
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Central Appalachian
Coal Company, Respondents.
No. 91-1104.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 26, 1991.
Decided Sept. 12, 1991.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (89-1634-BLA)
Emra E. Campbell, petitioner pro se.
Helen Hart Cox, Barbara J. Johnson, United States Department of Labor, Washington, D.C., David S. Russo, Robinson & McElwee, Charleston, W. Va., for respondents.
Ben.Rev.Bd.
AFFIRMED.
Before WILKINSON and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.
OPINION
PER CURIAM:
Emra E. Campbell 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 et seq. Our review of the record and the Board's decision and order discloses that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Campbell v. DOWCP, 89-1634-BLA (Ben.Rev.Bd. Mar. 26, 1991). 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.*
We note that if Campbell desires to submit additional evidence, he may do so by filing a motion for modification with the deputy commissioner pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 725.310
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
943 F.2d 48, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 25439, 1991 WL 176163, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/emra-e-campbell-v-director-office-of-workers-compe-ca4-1991.