Court Opinion

ID: 991089
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-03 23:31:35.185672+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:14:40.591525
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

WILLIAM FLUHARTY,
Petitioner,

v.

DONALDSON MINING COMPANY;
                                                               No. 96-1927
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS'
COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED
STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,
Respondents.

On Petition for Review of an Order of
the Benefits Review Board.
(95-2189-BLA)

Submitted: December 12, 1996

Decided: December 24, 1996

Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and LUTTIG,
Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

S. F. Raymond Smith, RUNDLE & RUNDLE, L.C., Pineville, West
Virginia, for Petitioner. Douglas A. Smoot, JACKSON & KELLY,
Charleston, West Virginia, for Respondents.

_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

William Fluharty, a former coal miner, seeks review of a decision
of the Benefits Review Board (Board) affirming an administrative law
judge's (ALJ) decision to deny his application for black lung benefits.
The ALJ denied benefits in this case based on his finding that Flu-
harty failed to establish the presence of pneumoconiosis or that his
pneumoconiosis contributed to his totally disabling respiratory
impairment. The Board affirmed the finding of no pneumoconiosis,
and found it unnecessary to address the causation issue.

On appeal, Fluharty contends that the ALJ erred by finding the
medical opinion evidence insufficient to establish pneumoconiosis
pursuant to 20 C.F.R. § 718.202(a)(4) (1996). We disagree. Fluharty's
contentions that the reports credited by the ALJ finding no pneumoco-
niosis were impermissibly based solely on negative X-rays and the
fact that the claimant's impairment was obstructive are belied by the
record. Dr. Crisalli, on whose opinion the ALJ primarily relied,
explicitly acknowledged that pneumoconiosis could produce an
obstructive defect, but stated that the nature of the claimant's particu-
lar obstructive defect was inconsistent with pneumoconiosis. More-
over, he and other physicians finding no pneumoconiosis in this case
explained in great detail how not only the negative X-ray evidence,
but also the miner's history, symptoms, physical examinations, and
objective studies supported their conclusion that the miner's pulmo-
nary disease is solely attributable to smoking.

Accordingly, the decision of the Board is affirmed. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are ade-
quately presented in the materials before the court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

                    2