Marcella Kosik v. Director OWCP ( 2002 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                                                            Opinions of the United
    2002 Decisions                                                                                                             States Court of Appeals
    for the Third Circuit
    10-30-2002
    Marcella Kosik v. Director OWCP
    Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential
    Docket No. 01-3176
    Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2002
    Recommended Citation
    "Marcella Kosik v. Director OWCP" (2002). 2002 Decisions. Paper 689.
    http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2002/689
    This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova
    University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2002 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova
    University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.
    NOT PRECEDENTIAL
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 01-3176
    ___________
    MARCELLA KOSIK
    (Widow of GEORGE M. KOSIK),
    Petitioner
    v.
    DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
    _______________________________________________
    On Petition for Review of a Decision and Order of the
    Benefits Review Board, United States Department of Labor
    (BRB No. 00-0923 BLA)
    ___________________
    Argued March 7, 2002
    Decided July 25, 2002
    Petition for Panel Rehearing Granted and Opinion and Judgment Vacated
    September 9, 2002
    Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
    September 9, 2002
    Before: SCIRICA and COWEN, Circuit Judges, and
    RESTANI, Judge, United States Court of International Trade*
    (Filed October 29, 2002)
    __________________
    OPINION OF THE COURT
    __________________
    PER CURIAM.
    This appeal arises from a Benefits Review Board's order that affirmed the decision
    of an administrative law judge (“ALJ”) to deny Marcella Kosik’s claim for survivor’s
    benefits. The ALJ denied Mrs. Kosik's claim under the Black Lung Benefits Act, as
    amended, 
    30 U.S.C. §§ 910-934
    , on the grounds that pneumoconiosis did not contribute to
    the death of her husband, George Kosik.
    We will reverse.
    I.
    We have jurisdiction over this black lung benefits appeal under 
    30 U.S.C. § 932
    (a).
    See Lukosevicz v. Director, OWCP, 
    888 F.2d 1001
    , 1003 (3d Cir. 1989).
    We review the Board’s decision for errors of law and to ensure the Board has adhered to its
    scope of review. See Oravitz v. Director, OWCP, 
    843 F.2d 738
    , 739 (3d Cir. 1988).
    *The Honorable Jane A. Restani, Judge, United States Court of International Trade,
    sitting by designation.
    2
    Therefore, we must conduct an independent review of the record and “decide whether the
    ALJ’s findings are supported by substantial evidence.” Sun Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co. v.
    McCabe, 
    593 F.2d 234
    , 237 (3d Cir. 1979). “‘Substantial evidence’ has been defined as
    ‘more than a mere scintilla. It means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might
    accept as adequate to support a conclusion.’” Kowalchick v. Director, OWCP, 
    983 F.2d 615
    , 620 (3d Cir. 1990) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted).
    II.
    The ALJ and the Board set forth the background of the matter in their respective
    decisions, so we need not go into great detail here. In short, Kosik worked as a coal miner
    from 1943 until 1972 and as a carpenter from 1972 until his retirement in 1993 at age 65.
    As a result of his having worked in coal mines for twenty nine years, Kosik suffered from
    pneumoconiosis,1 for which he received treatment from Drs. Lewis Druffner, Eugene
    Pelczar and Joseph Koval. Kosik was treated by Dr. Druffner for sixteen years and Dr.
    Pelczar for six years. Dr. Koval treated Kosik during Kosik's final hospitalization, which
    lasted from the time he suffered a stroke on November 13, 1996 until he died on
    November 23, 1996.
    On March 4, 1998, Mrs. Kosik filed a claim for survivor’s benefits under the Black
    Lung Benefits Act, asserting that coal worker’s pneumoconiosis hastened her husband’s
    death. All three of Kosik's treating physicians opined that after suffering the stroke,
    1
    It is undisputed by the Department of Labor's medical expert, Dr. Perper, that Kosik had
    pneumoconiosis.
    3
    pneumoconiosis hastened Kosik’s death. Dr. Joshua Perper, a non-treating physician
    retained by the Department of Labor to review the medical records and autopsy slides,2
    opined that Kosik’s pneumoconiosis was too mild to have hastened his death. Dr. Perper
    concluded that "Kosik died of a massive cerebro-vascular incident (massive brain stem
    infarct) with terminal mild bronchopneumonia."
    Based on Dr. Perper's opinion, the Administrative Law Judge denied Mrs. Kosik’s
    claim for survivor’s benefits after a December 16, 2000 hearing. See Kosik v. Director,
    OWCP, 1999-BLA-00235 (May 16, 2000) (App. 21A-32A). On June 15, 2001, the
    Benefits Review Board affirmed the ALJ’s decision, concluding that it was supported by
    substantial evidence in the record. See Kosik v. Director, OWCP, BRB No. 00-0923 BLA
    (June 15, 2001) (App. 13A-20A).3
    2
    At one point, Dr. Perper describes observing "unquestionable evidence" of
    pneumoconiosis in the autopsy slides.
    3
    On July 25, 2002, we denied the petition for review and affirmed the decision of the
    Benefits Review Board. Kosik v. Dir., OWCP, No. 01-3176, 
    2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 14978
    , at *12 (3d Cir. July 25, 2002) (not precedential). Mrs. Kosik filed a petition for
    rehearing en banc, which was granted. Kosik v. Dir., OWCP, No. 01-3176, 
    2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 21121
     (3d Cir. Sept. 9, 2002) (order). The prior opinion was vacated [, id.,] and the
    panel has reconsidered.
    4
    III.
    The Black Lung Benefits Act is a remedial measure. Lukosevicz v. Dir., OWCP,
    
    888 F.2d 1001
    , 1006 (3d Cir. 1989). Pneumoconiosis "is a serious and progressive
    pulmonary condition popularly known as 'black lung.'" Mullins Coal Co. of Va. v. Dir.,
    OWCP, 
    484 U.S. 135
    , 138 (1987). It is "a chronic dust disease of the lung and its
    sequelae, including respiratory and pulmonary impairments, arising out of coal mine
    employment." 
    30 U.S.C. § 902
    (b) (1986). Pneumoconiosis that hastens death in any way
    qualifies as a substantial cause of death and dictates the award of benefits. See Mancia v.
    Dir., OWCP, 
    130 F.3d 579
    , 585 (3d Cir. 1997).
    The record contains uncontradicted evidence of a history of Kosik's shortness of
    breath4 and pulmonary disease. In 1983, thirteen years before his November 1996
    hospitalization, Kosik suffered from shortness of breath upon exertion. Dr. Pelczar,5 who
    treated Kosik on a monthly basis from 1990 to 1996, stated that Kosik "was consistently
    short of breath" and as a result, he prescribed "Aminophylline 200 mg to be taken three
    times daily as needed." Kosik underwent pulmonary function studies in 1990 and 1995.
    These studies consistently showed abnormal results in pulmonary lung restriction,
    4
    Kosik’s widow and son documented Kosik’s shortness of breath and consistent
    breathing problems through lay testimony at the administrative hearing. While not sworn in
    as an expert, Kosik’s son is an osteopath, board-certified in internal medicine.
    5
    Dr. Pelzcar has served as an "impartial physician for the State of Pennsylvania for
    determinations regarding anthrasilicosis since 1962."
    5
    demonstrating restrictive lung disease.6 Kosik had a weakened pulmonary reserve before
    he had the stroke in 1996.
    Kosik was admitted to the hospital on November 13, 1996, following “the abrupt
    onset of unresponsiveness." The next day, "[i]ncreased respiratory secretions occurred
    requiring suctioning." On November 19, "there was an abrupt deterioration in his
    respiratory status and he was intubated and placed on a ventilator and returned to the
    Intensive Care Unit." On November 21, the family decided not to pursue aggressive
    measures, and Kosik died two days later on November 23, 1996.
    The autopsy of Kosik’s lungs revealed "thick mucus" as well as "marked anthracoctic
    markings" and "silica crystals" consistent with "simple coal worker’s pneumoconiosis." The
    discharge summary listed "1. Brain Stem Infarct 2. Acute Respiratory Failure 3. Chronic
    Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Secondary to Anthracosilicosis 4. Arteriosclerotic
    Cardiovascular Disease 5. Diabetes Mellitus, Recent Onset, Type I" as the final diagnosis.
    Kosik’s treating physicians established a nexus between Kosik’s lung capacity as they
    observed it through physical examination and clinical studies, and his capacity to survive
    after suffering a stroke that impacted his lungs. Dr. Koval, who examined and treated Kosik
    during his final days, concluded,
    6
    Dr. Perper found unpersuasive the pulmonary function studies stating that the results do
    not qualify as totally disabling. But this is an irrelevant standard in this appeal. Here, the
    issue is whether Kosik's pneumoconiosis hastened his death in any way. Pulmonary
    function studies that show restrictive pulmonary disease before the stroke are highly
    probative.
    6
    [B]ased on my physical examination and in hospital care of Mr. Kosik, as
    well as my review of the autopsy findings, that anthrasilicosis directly
    contributed to, and hastened his death. Patients with anthrasilicosis which
    causes chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cannot cough effectively and
    therefore cannot effectively clear their pulmonary secretions. The end result
    is death due to respiratory failure. This is exactly what happened to Mr.
    Kosik in the period after he suffered his stroke.
    The ALJ largely based its decision on Dr. Perper’s expert opinion. As noted, Dr.
    Perper concluded that Kosik’s pneumoconiosis was too mild to hasten Kosik's death.
    Although Dr. Perper's opinion was otherwise comprehensive, he did not explain this
    conclusion nor discuss Kosik’s pre-existing lung restrictions and his weakened pulmonary
    reserve in relation to the secretions in his lungs which necessitated suctioning, intubation
    and mechanical ventilation. This is particularly troubling because all three treating
    physicians came to a different conclusion than Dr. Perper.7 Furthermore, there was
    insufficient evidence in the record to counter the medical opinions that Kosik’s death was
    hastened by his pneumoconiosis and that he did not die solely as the result of a brain stem
    7
    A treating physician's opinion does not per se trump that of a non-treating physician.
    But a non-treating doctor's opinion must be well supported and reasoned. A conclusory
    medical opinion will not suffice. See Mancia, 
    130 F.3d at 591
     ("Although there may be
    situations where the nature of a non-treating physician's report is sufficient, in context with
    all the other evidence in the case, to support a conclusion that is contrary to the opinion of
    a treating physician, this is not such a case."); Smith v. Schweiker, 
    795 F.2d 343
    , 345-46
    (4th Cir. 1986) ("While the [Board] is not bound by the opinion of a claimant's treating
    physician, that opinion is entitled to great weight for it reflects an expert judgment based on
    a continuing observation of the patient's condition over a prolonged period of time.
    Therefore, it may be disregarded only if there is persuasive contradictory evidence.").
    7
    infarct.8 Viewing the record as a whole, the grounds cited in support of the ALJ’s
    conclusion do not amount to substantial evidence.
    We have noted that "courts have repeatedly recognized that the remedial nature of
    the statute requires a liberal construction of the Black Lung entitlement program to ensure
    widespread benefits to miners and their dependents." Keating v. Dir., OWCP, 
    71 F.3d 1118
    (3d Cir. 1995) (citation omitted). Kosik worked in the coal mines for nearly three decades
    and developed pneumoconiosis. "[C]oal workers' pneumoconiosis . . . is a dreadful and
    insidious disease which interferes with the respiratory functions of its victims, and which
    slowly and progressively makes the very act of breathing more and more difficult." Curse v.
    Dir., OWCP, 
    843 F.2d 456
    , 457 (11th Cir. 1988) (quoting 124 Cong. Rec. S2,333 (daily
    ed. Feb. 6, 1978) (statement of Sen. Williams)).
    Kosik experienced more than a decade of breathing problems before his death.
    Kosik's spouse, physician-son, Dr. Druffner, Dr. Pelczar and Dr. Koval all observed
    increased breathing problems up to the time of Kosik's death. Kosik's pulmonary function
    studies revealed restrictive lung disease. After suffering a stroke, Kosik's lungs eventually
    filled with mucus that could not be cleared without suctioning, intubation and mechanical
    8
    See Lango v. Dir., OWCP, 
    104 F.3d 573
    , 576 (3d Cir. 1997) ("In Lukosevicz v. Dir.,
    OWCP, 
    888 F.2d 1001
     (3d Cir. 1989), this court considered the meaning of the regulatory
    phrase a 'substantially contributing cause or factor.' After surveying the legislative history
    of the 1981 Black Lung Benefits Amendments, we held that pneumoconiosis is a
    substantially contributing cause whenever it actually hastens a miner's death even if a
    disease unrelated to pneumoconiosis played a role as well. 
    Id. at 1006
    . Thus, we
    concluded that even if pneumoconiosis hastened by only a few days a miner's death from
    pancreatic cancer, there was a basis to award benefits.")
    8
    ventilation. The physicians that examined, tested and treated Kosik while he was alive
    concluded that his pneumoconiosis hastened his death. By contrast, Dr. Perper’s
    conclusion to the contrary is insufficiently explained or supported by the record.
    IV.
    For these reasons, we find that the ALJ’s decision was not supported by substantial
    evidence in the record. We will reverse the Board's order that affirmed the ALJ's denial of
    survivor benefits and remand for the limited purpose of awarding survivor's benefits.
    9
    10