Vance v. Apache Coal Company
Vance v. Apache Coal Company
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-1791
FAYE B. VANCE, Widow of Joseph Vance, Petitioner, versus
APACHE COAL COMPANY; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondents.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (96-977-BLA)
Submitted: July 2, 1998 Decided: July 16, 1998
Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Faye B. Vance, Petitioner Pro Se. Mark Elliott Solomons, Thomas Henry Odom, II, ARTER & HADDEN, Washington, D.C.; Patricia May Nece, Helen Hart Cox, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washing- ton, D.C., for Respondents.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
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. §§ 901-945 (West 1986 & Supp. 1998). Our review of the record discloses that the Board’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the Board. Vance v. Apache Coal Co., No. 96-977-BLA (BRB Apr. 25, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are ade- quately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.