Goley B. Bryson v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor Benco, Incorporated

54 F.3d 772, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17369, 1995 WL 311524
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedMay 22, 1995
Docket94-2518
StatusPublished

This text of 54 F.3d 772 (Goley B. Bryson v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor Benco, Incorporated) 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.

Bluebook
Goley B. Bryson v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor Benco, Incorporated, 54 F.3d 772, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17369, 1995 WL 311524 (4th Cir. 1995).

Opinion

54 F.3d 772
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Goley B. BRYSON, Petitioner,
v.
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, United
States Department of Labor; Benco, Incorporated,
Respondents.

No. 94-2518.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted April 20, 1995.
Decided May 22, 1995.

Goley B. Bryson, Petitioner Pro Se. Patricia May Nece, Eileen Mary McCarthy, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, DC; Darrly P. Hofe, HOWE, ANDERSON & STEYER, Washington, DC, for Respondents.

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Petitioner 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.A. Secs. 901-945 (West 1986 & Supp.1994). Our review of the record discloses that the Board's decision is based upon substantial evidence and that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Bryson v. DOWCP, No. CA-93-699-BLA (B.R.B. Nov. 1, 1994). 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

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
54 F.3d 772, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 17369, 1995 WL 311524, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goley-b-bryson-v-director-office-of-workers-compen-ca4-1995.