Robert L. Buster v. Donaldson Mining Company Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor

23 F.3d 399, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18430, 1994 WL 144254
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedApril 25, 1994
Docket93-1746
StatusPublished

This text of 23 F.3d 399 (Robert L. Buster v. Donaldson Mining Company Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor) 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
Robert L. Buster v. Donaldson Mining Company Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor, 23 F.3d 399, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18430, 1994 WL 144254 (4th Cir. 1994).

Opinion

23 F.3d 399
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.

Robert L. BUSTER, Petitioner,
v.
DONALDSON MINING COMPANY; Director, Office of Workers'
Compensation Programs, United States Department of
Labor, Respondents.

No. 93-1746.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Argued April 12, 1994.
Decided April 25, 1994.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (89-1498-BLA)

Robert L. Buster, Petitioner pro se.

Ann Brannon Rembrandt, Jackson & Kelly, Charleston, W.VA., Patricia May Nece, Alan G. Paez, U.S. Dept. of Labor, Washington, D.C., for respondents.

Ben.Rev.Bd.

AFFIRMED.

Before HAMILTON, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellant 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.1993). 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. Buster v. Donaldson Mining Co., No. 89-1498-BLA (B.R.B. Sept. 22, 1992). 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)
23 F.3d 399, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 18430, 1994 WL 144254, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robert-l-buster-v-donaldson-mining-company-directo-ca4-1994.