Southern Appalachian v. Holliday ( 1999 )


Menu:
  • UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN COAL
    COMPANY,
    Petitioner,
    v.
    No. 98-2594
    DEWEY HOLLIDAY; DIRECTOR,
    OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION
    PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES
    DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
    Respondents.
    On Petition for Review of an Order
    of the Benefits Review Board.
    (97-168-BLA)
    Submitted: May 28, 1999
    Decided: June 21, 1999
    Before WILKINSON, Chief Judge, and WILKINS
    and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.
    _________________________________________________________________
    Reversed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    _________________________________________________________________
    COUNSEL
    David L. Yaussy, ROBINSON & MCELWEE, Charleston, West Vir-
    ginia, for Petitioner. Frederick K. Muth, HENSLEY, MUTH, GAR-
    TON & HAYES, Bluefield, West Virginia, for Respondents.
    _________________________________________________________________
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
    Local Rule 36(c).
    _________________________________________________________________
    OPINION
    PER CURIAM:
    Southern Appalachian Coal Company ("employer") petitions for
    review of a Benefits Review Board ("Board") decision affirming an
    administrative law judge's ("ALJ") decision to award black lung ben-
    efits to Dewey Holliday, a former coal miner. The ALJ evaluated this
    claim under 20 C.F.R. Part 718 (1998), of the applicable regulations
    and determined that Holliday established that he suffered from totally
    disabling pneumoconiosis arising out of his coal mine employment.
    We must affirm the Board's decision if it properly decided that the
    ALJ's decision is supported by substantial evidence and is in accor-
    dance with law. See Doss v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensa-
    tion Programs, 
    53 F.3d 654
    , 658 (4th Cir. 1995).
    We need not address all of the contentions raised by employer on
    appeal. The claimant bore the burden of establishing all critical ele-
    ments of his claim by a preponderance of the evidence. See Director,
    Office of Workers' Compensation Programs v. Greenwich Collieries,
    
    512 U.S. 267
    , 281 (1994). Employer avers on appeal that the ALJ
    erred as a matter of law in finding the medical opinion evidence suffi-
    cient to prove that pneumoconiosis contributed to any totally dis-
    abling impairment the miner might have had. This causation showing
    is a critical element of a black lung claim. See Lane v. Union Carbide
    Corp., 
    105 F.3d 166
    , 170 (4th Cir. 1997). Because we agree with
    employer that the medical opinion evidence relevant to this issue can-
    not support the ALJ's finding of causation, the remaining issues in
    this appeal are moot.
    In finding causation, the ALJ relied on the opinions of Drs. Ras-
    mussen and Forehand. Dr. Rasmussen did not address disability,
    much less its cause. Dr. Forehand did, in a thorough and detailed
    report, opine that pneumoconiosis contributed to the miner's respira-
    tory impairment, which the doctor found to be totally disabling in
    2
    light of the exertional requirements of the miner's last coal mine job.
    Dr. Forehand's written reports even addressed the miner's 41 year
    smoking history and history of cardiovascular disease, and concluded
    that, despite the possibility that these histories could lead to respira-
    tory or pulmonary impairment, he still believed that coal dust expo-
    sure contributed to Mr. Holliday's disability.
    But Dr. Forehand subsequently contradicted these findings at his
    deposition. During cross-examination, he learned for the first time
    that the miner suffered myocardial infarctions in 1988 and 1990. He
    conceded that this was important information that he had requested
    from the miner but had not received. After reviewing the relevant
    medical evidence pertaining to the infarctions, he acknowledged that
    the heart attacks would have predominantly damaged the miner's left
    ventricle, and that this could decrease cardiac output, causing impair-
    ment during exercise. Dr. Forehand had relied heavily on the fact that
    during exercise blood gas testing, the miner exhibited a very low aer-
    obic threshold to find that coal dust exposure contributed to disability.
    He admitted, however, that the miner's heart condition could produce
    the same results on exercise blood gas testing.
    He also stated during his deposition that, while there are some
    cases in which he would be able to distinguish the effects of smoking
    from the effects of pneumoconiosis, he could not in this case. He
    explicitly conceded that all of the miner's impairment could be due
    to smoking. While Dr. Forehand did maintain that he could not rule
    out pneumoconiosis as a contributing factor to the miner's disability,
    that finding is clearly insufficient to affirmatively prove causation
    under a preponderance standard. Because the record contains no other
    evidence that could potentially connect the miner's disability to his
    coal mine employment, we are constrained to reverse the decision of
    the Board and remand with instructions to deny benefits. We dispense
    with oral argument in light of our prior order granting Holliday's
    motion to submit the case on the briefs, and because the facts and
    legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS
    3