Court Opinion

ID: 9816327
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 02:54:14.22153+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:04:26.905627
License: Public Domain

Judge NOONAN,
dissenting.
NOONAN, Judge.
The evidence offered to support the award in this case is the opinion of the doctor doing the autopsy, an opinion in which Drs. Schaaf and Mittal in conclusory fashion agreed. We do not weigh the evidence. But in this case, Dr. Rizkalla’s opinion was shot full of holes. Administrative Appeals Judge McGranery has already commented on the inadequacy of the administrative law judge’s review of the record. Drs. Oesterling and Sinnenberg noted that Dr. Rizkalla’s own autopsy report indicated that both sides of Machak’s heart showed thickening, not just the right side, as would be characteristic of cor pulmonale. Drs. Fino and Perper noted that Machak showed none of the clinical manifestations of cor pulmonale which would lead to the formation of blood clots, such as enlargement and dilation of the neck veins, swelling of the legs, abnormal heart sounds, and bed confinement. In contrast to the qualified opinion offered by Dr. Rizkalla, these four experts stated strongly that Machak died of a pulmonary embolism and that coal workers’ pneumoconiosis in no way contributed to Machak’s death. Because these four experts provided unrebutted testimony as to why the theory of petitioner’s primary authority is wrong, I would find that the order of the Benefits Review Board is not supported by substantial evidence, and I respectfully dissent.
TO THE CLERK OF COURT:
Please file the foregoing Not Precedential Opinion.