Court Opinion

ID: 9478263
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 06:44:18.138218+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:46:19.581027
License: Public Domain

WILL, Senior District Judge,
concurring.
I agree that, because the AU did not in his decision, as he should have, consider the medical opinions of Dr. Getty and Wilhel-mus on the ground that they were given three years before Helms’ blood gas studies, the case must be remanded for consideration of all the medical evidence. I write separately, however, because the majority opinion so strongly emphasizes the defendant’s evidence that it may be misunderstood as a peremptory direction to the AU to find for the defendant.
The statute is clear that if Helms’ undisputed total disability is “in whole or in part” a result of his coal mine employment or that, as we have said previously in Wetherill v. Director, OWCP, 812 F.2d 376, 380 (7th Cir.1987), pneumoconiosis was “a contributing cause” of his disability he is entitled to compensation under the Act.
We do not here decide that it was not. We do decide that the AU must make that determination in the light of all the medical evidence.