Evans v. Bath

First Circuit

Evans v. Bath

108 F.3d 328, 1997 WL 85789

CourtCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit

DecidedFebruary 27, 1997

Docket96-2178

StatusUnpublished

This text of 108 F.3d 328 (Evans v. Bath) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the First Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Evans v. Bath, 108 F.3d 328, 1997 WL 85789 (1st Cir. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

108 F.3d 328

NOTICE: First Circuit Local Rule 36.2(b)6 states unpublished opinions may be cited only in related cases.
Marie EVANS, Petitioner,
v.
BATH IRON WORKS CORPORATION, Respondent.

No. 96-2178.

United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit.

Feb. 27, 1997.

James W. Case and McTeague, Higbee, MacAdam, Case, Watson & Cohen on brief for petitioner.

Michelle Jodoin LaFond and Norman, Hanson & DeTroy on brief for respondent.

Before SELYA, Circuit Judge, CYR, Senior Circuit Judge, and LYNCH, Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Upon careful review of the administrative record and the parties' briefs, we conclude that the Administrative Law Judge's findings should not be overturned. Those findings, contrary to claimant's assertion of permanent work-related elbow and respiratory impairments, must be accepted because they are supported by substantial evidence in the record considered as a whole. See Bath Iron Works Corp. v. White, 584 F.2d 569, 573 (1st Cir.1978).

Affirmed. See 1st Cir. Loc. R. 27.1.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI