U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 2000

Salyers v. Clinchfield Coal Co

Salyers v. Clinchfield Coal Co
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided February 7, 2000

Salyers v. Clinchfield Coal Co

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-2052

GREER C. SALYERS, Petitioner, versus

CLINCHFIELD COAL COMPANY; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Respondents.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Benefits Review Board. (98-1312-BLA, 97-1902-BLA)

Submitted: December 22, 1999 Decided: February 7, 2000

Before MURNAGHAN and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Greer C. Salyers, Petitioner Pro Se. Timothy Ward Gresham, PENN, STUART & ESKRIDGE, Abingdon, Virginia; Patricia May Nece, Barry H.

Joyner, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, Washington, D.C., for Respondents.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Greer C. Salyers 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. 1999). 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. See Salyers v. Clinchfield Coal Co. BRB No. 98-1312-BLA (B.R.B. July 2, 1999). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.