Employer by motion dated January 27 1997 withdrew its appeal of the entitlement to benefits The Board granted this motion by Order dated April 14 1997 Pupo v State Coal Co BRB No 970523 ID: 845219
Download Pdf The PPT/PDF document "EmployerCarrier CrossResponden..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
1 Employer/Carrier- Cross-Respon
Employer/Carrier- Cross-Respondents Employer, by motion dated January 27, 1997, withdrew its appeal of the entitlement to benefits. The Board granted this motion by Order dated April 14, 1997. Pupo v. State Coal Co., BRB No. 97-0523 BLA (Apr. 14, 1997)(Order)(un
2 pub.). Consequently, since the parties
pub.). Consequently, since the parties do not challenge the administrative law judges award of benefits, this finding is affirmed. Skrack v. Island Creek Coal Co. In a Decision and Order dated September 9, 1986, Administrative Law Judge Leonard N. Lawrence (Judge Lawrence) denied benefits. Judge Lawrence found that
3 while the medical evidence of record was
while the medical evidence of record was sufficient to establish invocation of the interim presumption pursuant to 20 C.F.R. §727.203(a)(2), the medical evidence was also sufficient to establish rebuttal of the interim presumption pursuant to 20 C.F.R. §727.203(b)(3) and (b)(4). Judge Lawrence further found the evidenc
4 e of record insufficient to establish en
e of record insufficient to establish entitlement pursuant to 20 C.F.R. Part 410, Subpart D and 20 The Board, in a Decision and Order dated July 27,1989, affirmed Judge Lawrence's denial of be
5 nefits as supported by substantial evide
nefits as supported by substantial evidence. Pupo v. State Coal Co. O'Keeffe v. Smith, Hinchman & Grylls Edmiston v. F & R Coal Co application for benefits, October 10, 1973. Claimant had full opportunity to challenge the administrative law judges determination of the date from which benefits commence through a cro
6 ss-appeal to the Board following the adm
ss-appeal to the Board following the administrative law judges 1992 Decision and Order. Claimant, however, failed todecline to address claimants contentionstrative law judges determination that he is entitled to benefits commencing July 1, 1989. SeeGillen v. Peabody Coal Co., 16 BLR 1-22 (1991)(Stage, J., dissentin