Wills v. Director, Office of Workers Compensation Programs, U.S. Dept. of Labor

891 F.2d 288, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 16867, 1989 WL 141689
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedNovember 9, 1989
Docket89-2912
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 891 F.2d 288 (Wills v. Director, Office of Workers Compensation Programs, U.S. Dept. 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
Wills v. Director, Office of Workers Compensation Programs, U.S. Dept. of Labor, 891 F.2d 288, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 16867, 1989 WL 141689 (4th Cir. 1989).

Opinion

891 F.2d 288

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
Mary J. WILLS, Widow of John A. Wills, Petitioner,
v.
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; Westmoreland Coal
Company; Employers' Service
Corporation, Respondents.

No. 89-2912.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 10, 1989.
Decided: Nov. 9, 1989.

Mary J. Wills, petitioner pro se.

Sylvia Theresa Kaser, Irene Bernadette Wozny (United States Department of Labor), Laura E. Beverage (Jackson & Kelly), for respondents.

Before WIDENER, PHILLIPS and WILKINS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Mary J. Wills petitions for review of a final order of the Benefits Review Board (Board) denying her application for black lung benefits as the surviving spouse of John A. Wills pursuant to Title IV of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969, as amended, 30 U.S.C. § 901 et seq.

The Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, has filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction because the appeal was not filed within sixty days of the decision and order of the Board. Westmoreland Coal Company has joined in the motion for dismissal of the appeal.

The timely filing of a petition for review of an order of the Board with a Court of Appeals within sixty days is a jurisdictional prerequisite. See Butcher v. Big Mountain Coal, Inc., 802 F.2d 1506, 1508 (4th Cir.1986); 33 U.S.C. § 921(c); 30 U.S.C. § 932(a). Because Wills filed a petition for review on January 25, 1989, more than sixty days after the Board's order on reconsideration of November 21, 1988, it was untimely, and this Court is without jurisdiction to consider the appeal.

Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the dispositive issues recently have been decided authoritatively.

DISMISSED.

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

Related

Whisenant v. Eplin
891 F.2d 288 (Fourth Circuit, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
891 F.2d 288, 1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 16867, 1989 WL 141689, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wills-v-director-office-of-workers-compensation-programs-us-dept-of-ca4-1989.