Merther Treadway v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Dorvin R. Wilson v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare

584 F.2d 48, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 8593
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedOctober 5, 1978
Docket77-1994
StatusPublished

This text of 584 F.2d 48 (Merther Treadway v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Dorvin R. Wilson v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare) 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
Merther Treadway v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Dorvin R. Wilson v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 584 F.2d 48, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 8593 (4th Cir. 1978).

Opinion

584 F.2d 48

Merther TREADWAY, Appellant,
v.
Joseph A. CALIFANO, Jr., Secretary of the Department of
Health, Education and Welfare, Appellee.
Dorvin R. WILSON, Appellant,
v.
Joseph A. CALIFANO, Jr., Secretary of Health, Education and
Welfare, Appellee.

Nos. 77-1994, 77-2111.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Argued June 6, 1978.
Decided Oct. 5, 1978.

Richard W. Crews, Beckley, W. Va. (E. Carl Meadows, Jr., Meadows & Crews, Beckley, W. Va., on brief), for appellants in 77-1994 and 77-2111.

Rebecca A. Betts, Asst. U. S. Atty., Charleston, W. Va. (Robert B. King, U. S. Atty., Charleston, W. Va., and A. George Lowe, Sp. Asst. U. S. Atty., Baltimore, Md., on brief), for appellee in 77-1994 and 77-2111.

Before HAYNSWORTH, Chief Judge, and WINTER, BUTZNER, RUSSELL, WIDENER and HALL, Circuit Judges, sitting en banc.

HAYNSWORTH, Chief Judge:

Ordinarily, a court should apply the law as it exists at the time of decision. Bradley v. Richmond School Board, 416 U.S. 696, 94 S.Ct. 2006, 40 L.Ed.2d 476 (1974). Newly enacted statutes usually are to be given effect in still pending judicial proceedings. But the Black Lung Benefits Reform Act of 1977, enacted on March 1, 1978, we conclude, is an exception to the rule.

I.

In 1970 the claimants in these two cases filed applications for benefits under the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969, 30 U.S.C.A. § 801, et seq. After final administrative denial of these applications by the Secretary of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, each sought review in the district court. In each case the district court sustained the Secretary's denial of the benefits, and the claimants brought these appeals. While the appeals were pending in this court, on March 1, 1978, the Black Lung Benefits Reform Act of 1977, Public Law 95-239, was signed by the President and finally enacted. That Act substantially liberalized the criteria upon which such claims are adjudged and expanded the means by which they may be proven. It was obviously intended substantially to enlarge the number of allowable claims; and it provided agency reconsideration, upon the request of the claimant, of all pending and previously denied claims.

II.

The Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969, as amended in 1972 (hereinafter the 1969 Act), provided a comprehensive system for the payment of benefits to coal miners disabled by pneumoconiosis and to dependents of coal miners who had died of pneumoconiosis or while completely disabled by pneumoconiosis. In the beginning benefits were to be payable by the United States out of its general revenue, and the Act was to be administered by the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Ultimately, however, the economic burden of the payment of benefits was to be transferred to the coal mine operators, and the Secretary of Labor was to replace the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare as the administrator of the program.

In order to achieve this general purpose, provision was made in Part B for the filing of claims with the HEW through December 31, 1973.1 Part C provided for the filing of claims on January 1, 1974 and after with the Secretary of Labor and were to be paid by an individual coal mine operator, if identifiable, or by a trust fund created out of assessments upon the industry on a tonnage basis. Because the burden of the payment might be imposed upon an individual coal operator or upon the industry, unlike the adjudication of Part B claims, the proceedings in the Department of Labor on Part C claims were made adversarial. The coal mine operator or operators upon whom the burden of payment might be imposed were entitled to notice and to participation in the proceedings.

Almost from the beginning, apparently, the Congress was dissatisfied with the HEW's administration of the Act. It was thought that deserving claims were being impeded and denied. This thought prompted the adoption of the 1972 amendments liberalizing the standards to be applied in adjudicating the claims and creating a number of presumptions facilitating proof of claims. Administration of the 1969 Act, as amended in 1972, however, did not come up to congressional expectations. There was active consideration of further amendments in 1975, and the congressional purpose that still more claims be allowed and paid resulted in the Black Lung Benefits Reform Act of 1977.

The Black Lung Benefits Reform Act of 1977, in § 15, provides for an amendment of Part C, Title IV, of the 1969 Act by adding a new section to be numbered 435. That section provides for agency review of all Part B claims which were pending on March 1, 1978, the effective date of the Act, or which had been denied on or before that date. Upon the request of the claimant, that review may be had initially in the Department of Health, Education and Welfare or in the Department of Labor. If in HEW, and the claim is not allowed there, the entire record must be referred to the Secretary of Labor for rereview, and the Secretary of Labor is authorized to allow the claim notwithstanding nonallowance by HEW. Whatever the administrative route, however, the agencies are to apply and the case is to be judged under the substantive amendments effected by the 1977 Act. When a claim is referred to the Secretary of Labor, he is directed to treat it as a Part C claim and to provide the claimant with an opportunity to present additional medical and other evidence. However, under subsection c, "Any individual whose claim is approved pursuant to this section shall be awarded benefits on a retroactive basis for a period which begins no earlier than January 1, 1974."

In these cases, the claimants are seeking benefits under the 1969 Act. They were considered in the Department on that basis, and review in the district court was on that basis. If they should be entitled to such benefits, they may be entitled to retroactive payments back to the time their claims were filed in 1970,2 or, if later, when each become totally disabled with pneumoconiosis. Should they obtain entitlement upon § 15 review under the 1977 Act, however, subsection (c) would limit the payment of retroactive benefits to those accruing since January 1, 1974. Obviously these claimants have a stake in processing their claims under the 1969 Act.

The history of the 1977 Act shows clearly congressional concern that too few miners were being paid the benefits Congress had intended to provide them when enacting the legislation in 1969 and 1972.3 There is no suggestion in the legislative history anywhere of a congressional intention to take anything away from any miner, or to limit benefits which were available to him prior to enactment of the 1977 Act.

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

Related

Bradley v. School Bd. of Richmond
416 U.S. 696 (Supreme Court, 1974)
Petry v. Califano
577 F.2d 860 (Fourth Circuit, 1978)
Treadway v. Califano
584 F.2d 48 (Fourth Circuit, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
584 F.2d 48, 1978 U.S. App. LEXIS 8593, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/merther-treadway-v-joseph-a-califano-jr-secretary-of-the-department-of-ca4-1978.