Lion Mining Co v. Director OWCP , 222 F. App'x 227 ( 2007 )

Opinions of the United
2007 Decisions States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit
4-17-2007
Lion Mining Co v. Director OWCP
Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential
Docket No. 05-4243
Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2007
Recommended Citation
"Lion Mining Co v. Director OWCP" (2007). 2007 Decisions. Paper 1282.
http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2007/1282
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 2007 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NOT PRECEDENTIAL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. 05-4243
LION MINING COMPANY;
FIRE & CASUALTY COMPANY OF CONNECTICUT,
Petitioners,
v.
DARLENE A. COUTTS ( Widow of Ward J. Coutts);
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAMS,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
Respondents.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the
Benefits Review Board
(BRB No. 02-BLA-0121)
Submitted under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
on July 11, 2006
Before: SMITH, ALDISERT and ROTH, Circuit Judges.
(Opinion Filed: April 17, 2007 )
O P I N I ON
ROTH, Circuit Judge:
Darlene A. Coutts is the widow of Ward J. Coutts, Jr., a former coal miner. After
Mr. Coutts passed away in May 2000, Mrs. Coutts filed an application as a surviving
spouse for benefits pursuant to the black lung benefits provisions of Title IV of the Federal
Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969, as amended, 30 U.S.C. § 901 et seq. To be
eligible for benefits, a claimant must establish that the miner had pneumoconiosis which
arose out of coal mine employment, and that the miner’s death was due to
pneumoconiosis. 20 C.F.R. § 718.205(a). A miner’s death is due to pneumoconiosis if
pneumoconiosis caused the death or was a substantially contributing cause such that it
hastened the death. 20 C.F.R. § 718.205(c). Mrs. Coutts received a hearing to determine
the cause of death before an administrative law judge (ALJ), who heard testimony and
received reports regarding the cause of death from a number of medical experts. The ALJ
concluded that Mrs. Coutts was entitled to recover benefits because pneumoconiosis was a
substantial contributing cause of Mr. Coutts’s death.
On appeal, the Benefits Review Board (“the Board”) vacated and remanded the
matter to the ALJ so that he could rule on the admissibility of a report and
photomicropgraphs prepared by the employer’s expert pathologist, Dr. Osterling. On
remand, the ALJ admitted all the proffered evidence and again found in favor of Mrs.
Coutts. The Board affirmed this determination. Petitioner files a timely petition for
review, which we will deny.
2
The Board exercised subject matter jurisdiction over Mrs. Coutt’s claim for black
lung benefits pursuant to 30 U.S.C. § 932(a), which incorporates 33 U.S.C. § 921(b),
authorizing the Board to hear and determine appeals from decisions with respect to claims
by employees. We have jurisdiction to review the Board’s determination pursuant to 33
U.S.C. § 921(c). We exercise plenary review over the Board's interpretation of law and
we also exercise plenary review to satisfy ourselves that the Board adhered to the statutory
scope of review. Barbera v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, 245
F.3d 282, 287 (3d Cir. 2001). The Board — and, by extension, we — must accept the
ALJ's findings unless they are contrary to law, irrational or unsupported by substantial
evidence in the record as a whole. Id. Substantial evidence is defined as such relevant
evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Soubik v.
Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs, 366 F.3d 226, 233 (3d Cir. 2004).
Petitioner contends that the ALJ’s determination is unsupported by substantial
evidence because it runs contrary to the findings of its expert, Dr. Osterling. Dr. Osterling
provided testimony and reports in which he concluded that macro-nodules were absent
from Mr. Coutts’s autopsy slides; rather, what appeared to be macro-nodules were really
just micro-nodules clustered together. According to Dr. Osterling, absent macro-nodules,
pneumoconiosis could not have been a substantial contributing cause of death. Other
experts, however, opined that when micro-nodules cluster together, the micro-nodules can
have the same effect on the miner as do macro-nodules. In light of the conflicting
opinions regarding the effects of clustering, a reasonable person examining the evidence
3
easily could find it adequate to support a determination that pneumoconiosis was a
substantial contributing cause of Mr. Coutts’s death.
Accordingly, we find that the ALJ’s determination was legal, rational, and
supported by substantial evidence. The Board acted within its authority to affirm the
determination. The petition for review will be denied..
4