Drummond Company, Inc. v. Gary C. Cox ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •            Case: 17-15511   Date Filed: 07/25/2018    Page: 1 of 7
    [DO NOT PUBLISH]
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
    ________________________
    No. 17-15511
    Non-Argument Calendar
    ________________________
    Agency No. BRB No. 17-0047 BLA
    DRUMMOND COMPANY, INC.,
    Petitioner,
    versus
    GARY C. COX,
    DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS
    COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
    Respondents.
    ________________________
    Petition for Review of a Decision of the
    Benefits Review Board
    ________________________
    (July 25, 2018)
    Before WILLIAM PRYOR, MARTIN and JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:
    Case: 17-15511     Date Filed: 07/25/2018   Page: 2 of 7
    Drummond Company, Inc., petitions for review of a decision affirming an
    award of benefits to Gary Cox, a former coal miner, under the Black Lung Benefits
    Act. 
    30 U.S.C. §§ 901
    –44. Drummond Company argues that Cox’s claim for
    benefits in 2013 was untimely because he received notice from his treating
    physician in 2004 or 2005 that he was totally disabled due to his pneumoconiosis.
    We deny the petition.
    In 2013, Cox filed a second application for benefits under the Black Lung
    Act, after having abandoned an earlier application. Drummond conceded that Cox
    suffered from pneumoconiosis caused by his work as a coal miner and that he was
    totally disabled due to pneumoconiosis, but the company argued that Cox’s
    application was untimely.
    Drummond appealed a preliminary determination by the Deputy Director of
    the Office of Workers Compensation Programs that Cox was eligible for benefits,
    but an administrative law judge also ruled in Cox’s favor. The administrative law
    judge held an evidentiary hearing and determined that Drummond failed to rebut
    the presumption that Cox’s claim was timely.
    The administrative law judge found that Cox’s treating pulmonologist, Dr.
    Jan Westerman, diagnosed Cox with pneumoconiosis and advised Cox that he was
    disabled, but the doctor never told Cox that his disability was connected to his
    pneumoconiosis. The administrative law judge also found that Cox’s deposition
    2
    Case: 17-15511     Date Filed: 07/25/2018    Page: 3 of 7
    testimony was ambiguous and that his testimony during the hearing “merit[ed]
    little probative weight because it [was] inconsistent, ambiguous, and in response to
    leading questions.”
    Drummond appealed, and the Benefits Review Board affirmed. The Board
    agreed with the finding that Cox’s deposition testimony was too ambiguous to
    establish that he learned he was totally disabled due to pneumoconiosis more than
    three years before he filed his second application for benefits. The Board also
    found that “all of the remaining evidence . . . [failed to] establish when [Cox] was
    told he was totally disabled due to pneumoconiosis.”
    We review de novo the decision of the Benefits Review Board. The
    Pittsburg & Midway Coal Mining Co. v. Dir., Office of Workers’ Comp. Programs,
    
    508 F.3d 975
    , 980 (11th Cir. 2007). When the Board affirms an award of benefits
    under the Act, that decision is “effectively cloak[ed] . . . with the same deference”
    owed to the decision of the administrative law judge. 
    Id.
     (quoting U S Steel Mining
    Co. v. Director, OWCP, 
    386 F.3d 977
    , 984 (11th Cir. 2004)). “Decisions of the
    [administrative law judge] are reviewable only as to whether they are in
    accordance with law and supported by substantial evidence in light of the entire
    record.” U S Steel Mining, 
    386 F.3d at 984
    . Substantial evidence consists of “such
    relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a
    conclusion.” 
    Id.
     (quoting Richardson v. Perales, 
    402 U.S. 389
    , 401 (1971)).
    3
    Case: 17-15511      Date Filed: 07/25/2018     Page: 4 of 7
    The Black Lung Benefits Act requires a miner to file his “claim for benefits
    . . . within three years after . . . a medical determination of total disability due to
    pneumoconiosis” has been made. 
    30 U.S.C. § 932
    (f). The period of limitations
    commences running when the medical determination is “communicated to the
    miner.” 
    20 C.F.R. § 725.308
    (a). Section 725.308 establishes “a rebuttable
    presumption that every claim for benefits is timely filed.” 
    Id.
     § 725.308(c). “The
    employer bears the burden of production and persuasion in establishing rebuttal.”
    Black Diamond Coal Mining Co. v. Benefits Review Bd., 
    758 F.2d 1532
    , 1534
    (11th Cir. 1985). To rebut the presumption, the employer must prove that the miner
    knew of the medical determination at least three years before he filed his
    application for benefits. See Robbins v. Jim Walter Res., Inc., 
    898 F.2d 1478
    , 1483
    (11th Cir. 1990).
    Substantial evidence supports the determination that Cox’s deposition
    testimony was inconsistent, ambiguous, and insufficient to prove that Dr.
    Westerman told Cox that his disability was due to his pneumoconiosis. Cox
    testified that Dr. Westerman told Cox that he had pneumoconiosis and that he
    would not “be able to go back to work, not in the dust and all,” but advising Cox to
    seek alternative employment did not communicate to him that he was totally
    disabled. When Drummond asked Cox if he had been told that he was “totally
    disabled due to [his] interstitial lung disease due to coal work,” Cox responded that
    4
    Case: 17-15511     Date Filed: 07/25/2018    Page: 5 of 7
    “it had to pertain from[ coal dust because] that’s what [he] was doing.” Cox’s
    response addressed the cause of his pneumoconiosis. The administrative law judge
    acted in a reasoned manner by finding that Dr. Westerman told Cox that he had
    pneumoconiosis and that he was disabled, but the doctor did not tell Cox that his
    disability was due to his pneuoconiosis. See Bradberry v. Dir., OWCP, 
    117 F.3d 1361
    , 1367 (11th Cir. 1997).
    Substantial evidence also supports the determination that Cox’s testimony
    during the evidentiary hearing was too ambiguous to contradict his deposition
    testimony. That Cox said, “yes,” when asked if he had testified during his
    deposition that Dr. Westerman “told you that you were permanently disabled as a
    result of your lung disease that you got as a result of your coal mine employment”
    was confusing because, as the administrative law judge explained, Cox could have
    been “confirming what Dr. Westerman told him or confirming his belief as to the
    cause of his disability.” The administrative law judge also reasonably found that,
    when Cox responded to the question, “Do you dispute that testimony,” with the
    answer, “I just said I was disabled,” that answer “d[id] not support his earlier
    [testimony] that Dr. Westerman told him he [was] totally disabled . . . .” And Cox
    testified that he requested for Drummond to assign him to work outside instead of
    in the coal mine at the doctor’s recommendation and that the doctor did not impose
    further limitations on his ability to work. Even if we would interpret Cox’s
    5
    Case: 17-15511     Date Filed: 07/25/2018    Page: 6 of 7
    testimony differently, that fact would not be sufficient to disturb the administrative
    law judge’s determination that Dr. Westerman did not tell Cox that he was disabled
    due to his pneumoconiosis. See Black Diamond Coal Mining, 
    758 F.2d at 1534
    .
    There is also substantial evidence to support the administrative law judge’s
    determination that Dr. Westerman did not tell Cox that he was totally disabled. In
    June 2004, Dr. Westerman recorded in his treatment notes that he told Cox that he
    had pneumoconiosis, yet he only “recommended [Cox’s] removal from the
    workplace” for 12 weeks. Dr. Westerman’s treatment notes in June 2005 state that
    he diagnosed Cox as being “disabled indefinitely,” but those notes do not reflect
    that he shared the diagnosis with Cox or, even if he did, that he had diagnosed Cox
    as being totally, as opposed to partially, disabled. And Dr. Westerman testified that
    he did not “recall placing restrictions on” Cox and had advised Cox “not [to] work
    in the conditions of the coal mine” and to “stay away from an environment where
    he would be exposed to coal and rock dust or other breathing irritations.” The
    medical records and Dr. Westerman’s testimony did not establish that he told Cox
    that he was unable to work.
    Other evidence in the record supported the determination that Cox timely
    applied for benefits. In October 2015, Dr. Michael Connolly Jr. diagnosed Cox as
    totally disabled due to his coal workers’ pneumoconiosis. And in 2009, Drummond
    acknowledged in a written agreement that settled Cox’s complaint for state
    6
    Case: 17-15511     Date Filed: 07/25/2018    Page: 7 of 7
    workers’ compensation benefits that the “extent of [his] temporary total disability,
    permanent partial disability, and permanent total disability, if any,” was disputed.
    Drummond argues that its evidence proved that Cox knew that his total
    disability was due to pneumoconiosis long before he filed his second application
    for benefits, but the administrative law judge reasonably reached a contrary
    conclusion. Cox obtained a certificate of disability from a physician in 2004 stating
    that Cox had severe lung disease and granulomatous pneumonitis, but the
    certificate failed to mention either pneumoconiosis or total disability. That Dr.
    William A. Crunk Jr., a vocational expert, opined in 2006 that Cox’s “age,
    education, work background, [and] breathing impairment with residual shortness of
    breath and fatigue . . . would [result in] a 100% loss of earning capacity” did not
    establish that Cox knew the cause of his disability. Evidence that Cox underwent
    two medical evaluations in 2007 to obtain state workers’ compensation benefits,
    was equally unhelpful to Drummond because both doctors eliminated
    pneumoconiosis as the cause of Cox’s disability. Dr. Jack H. Hassan diagnosed
    Cox with dyspnea that was multifactorial and found “no evidence of
    pneumoconiosis” or of a connection between Cox’s work in the coal mines and his
    medical problems, and Dr. Allan R. Goldstein interpreted an x-ray image of Cox’s
    chest as being inconsistent with occupational pneumoconiosis.
    We DENY the petition for review filed by Drummond.
    7