Nacirema Operating Co., Inc. v. Benefits Review Bd., U.S. Dept. of Labor, Washington, D.C.
Decision Date | 02 July 1976 |
Docket Number | No. 75-1984,75-1984 |
Citation | 538 F.2d 73 |
Parties | NACIREMA OPERATING CO., INC., and Liberty Mutual Insurance Co., Petitioners, v. BENEFITS REVIEW BOARD, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, WASHINGTON, D. C., and Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, United States Department of Labor, Respondents. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
Vincent H. Cohen, Anne White Foley, Hogan & Hartson, Washington, D. C., for petitioners.
William J. Kilberg, Sol. of Labor, Laurie M. Streeter, Associate Sol., Harry L. Sheinfeld, Atty., U. S. Dept. of Labor, Washington, D. C., for Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, for respondents.
Before BIGGS, GIBBONS and HUNTER, Circuit Judges.
This petition to review an order of the Benefits Review Board involves many of the same issues decided recently in the companion case of Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc. v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, --- F.2d ---- (3d Cir. 1976). In this instance the claimant is a permanently disabled longshoreman rather than the widow of a deceased longshoreman. The Atlantic & Gulf case controls here and requires that we set aside the decision of the Benefits Review Board.
On May 25, 1973, claimant Peter Fulton suffered a heart attack while engaged in longshoring activities for petitioner Nacirema Operating Company, a stevedore. In July of 1973 Fulton filed a claim for benefits under the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C. §§ 901-50. The Administrative Law Judge found that the heart attack was work-related and has left the claimant permanently disabled. Neither the employer nor the Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, contested those findings. Thus the claimant was not a respondent before the Benefits Review Board and is not a respondent here.
The Administrative Law Judge also found that prior to his myocardial infarction on May 25, 1973, Fulton was suffering from a permanent partial disability within the meaning of § 8(f) of the LHWCA, 33 U.S.C. § 908(f). He further found:
"The evidence is totally persuasive that the Claimant was suffering from a 'manifest' disability which existed previous to his heart attack on May 23, 1973, and that the provisions of Section 8(f) of the Act are applicable to this case."
The Director appealed to the Benefits Review Board, contending that the Administrative Law Judge erred in holding that § 8(f) applied. The Board acknowledged that there was ample evidence of previous hypertension, an episode of congestive heart failure, and diabetes mellitus. It also acknowledged that these conditions kept Fulton out of work from May 1972 until the beginning of August 1972. The Board observed that there was no express finding by the Administrative Law Judge that the claimant's total permanent disability was not solely attributable to the heart attack he suffered on May 25, 1973, but concluded:
"However, it seems implicit in the Decision and Order (of the Administrative Law Judge) that despite his relating the claimant's total permanent disability to the heart attack, the administrative law judge did not consider the acute myocardial infarction to be the sole cause of disability, since he also found that the claimant was suffering from an existing permanent partial disability, manifest to the employer."
It is perfectly clear that the Administrative Law Judge did so find. Indeed, the Director's memorandum to the Board in support of the petition for review did not contend that there were any gaps in the Administrative Law Judge's fact finding. Rather, it urged a reversal of the § 8(f) finding as a matter of law because hypertension and diabetes did not qualify as § 8(f) disabilities.
Relying on Aleksiejczyk v. Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc.,1 B.R.B.S. 541 (1975), which we have now reversed, the Board said:
"The issue, then, is whether or not these conditions were contributing causes to the claimant's total permanent disability and were disabling in an economic sense, so as to permit a finding of 'existing permanent partial disability.' " (emphasis supplied).
The Board ordered a remand for additional findings by the Administrative Law Judge, but it is quite clear that the sole purpose of the remand was to permit reconsideration in the light of a legal standard which we have held to be inappropriate. The Administrative Law Judge found that the hypertension and diabetes contributed to the heart attack which resulted in permanent disability, and that the prior disability was manifest to the employer. Those findings are supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole and are conclusive on the Board. Atlantic & Gulf Stevedores, Inc. v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, supra. Since the Administrative Law Judge could not on remand apply the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, U.S. Dept. of Labor v. Eastern Coal Corp.
... ... Solomons, U. S. Dept. of Labor, Washington, D. C., for petitioner in both cases ... Benefits Review Bd., U. S. Dept. of Labor, Washington, D ... Although the two cases are not before us upon the merits, their nature has a bearing upon ... Fields v. A.K.P. Coal Co., 3 Benefits Rev.Bd.Serv. 269 (1976), rev'd on ... 1976), and Offshore Food Service, Inc. v. Benefits Review Board, 524 F.2d 967 (5th Cir ... ----, 97 S.Ct. 2972, 53 L.Ed.2d 1092. Nacirema Operating Co. v. Benefits Review Board, 538 F.2d ... ...
-
Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, U.S. Dept. of Labor v. Peabody Coal Co.
... ... Solomons, U. S. Dept. of Labor, Washington, D. C., for petitioner ... He filed a claim for benefits under Part C of Title IV of the Federal Coal Mine ... appealed this decision to the Benefits Review Board (BRB). On April 19, 1976, the BRB vacated ... A.K.P. Coal Company, Inc., 3 BRBS 269 (1976), being reconsidered on other ... as to this court's jurisdiction requires us to resolve the thorny questions arising out of ... 3417 (November 24, 1976) (No. 730); Nacirema Operating Co., Inc. v. Benefits Review Board, 538 ... ...
-
Kalaris v. Donovan
... ... Raymond J. DONOVAN, Secretary of Labor, et al., Appellants ... Julius MILLER, ... Kopp and Alfred R. Mollin, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., were on the brief, ... The Department of Labor's Benefits Review Board hears appeals from decisions of ... Page 383 ... Shipbuilding Co. v. Bonner, 600 F.2d 1288, 1292 (9th Cir.1979); ... the Board] in motion," Continental Air Lines, Inc. v. CAB, 519 F.2d 944, 954-955 (D.C.Cir.1975), ... 802.301 (1982) ... 17 See, e.g., Nacirema Operating Co. v. Benefits Review Board, 538 F.2d ... rules of statutory construction would instruct us to construe the statute in a way that provides ... ...
-
Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, U.S. Dept. of Labor v. O'Keefe
... ... Gillelan, II, U.S. Dept. of Labor, Washington, D.C., for petitioner ... Paul ... On this petition for review of a final order of the Benefits Review Board we ... The decedent's employer, Morris Boney, Inc., and its insurance carrier, Liberty Mutual ance Co., stipulated that the respondent was entitled to ... parties urge that the question presented to us, whether death benefits are subject to the same ... injury disabilities; attorney's fees); Nacirema Operating Co. v. Benefits Review Board, 538 F.2d ... ...