OFFSHORE FOOD SERVICE, INC. AND AETNA CASUALTY & SURETY COMPANY, PETITIONERS,
v.
BENEFITS REVIEW BOARD ET AL., RESPONDENTS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed the Benefits Review Board's decision, finding the ALJ's findings supported by substantial evidence and attorney fees reasonable.
A longshoreman was awarded disability benefits. The Benefits Review Board affirmed this award. The employer petitioned for review of the Board's decis…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
This is a petition for review of the decision of the Benefits Review Board affirming a compensation order entered by an Administrative Law Judge awarding disability benefits to a longshoreman pursuant to the Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C. § 901 et seq., as extended by the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. § 1333.
The motion of the Benefits Review Board to dismiss it as a party respondent to this appeal is granted. Neither the statutory provisions for review, 33 U.S.C. § 921(c), (Supp. II, 1972), nor Rule 15(a), F.R.A.P., requires the Board be a party, nor is its presence as a party necessary to effectuation of orders this court may enter.1 The findings of the ALJ are supported by substantial evidence considered on the record as a whole. The attorney fees awarded to counsel for the claimant were reasonable. Thus the order of the Board is affirmed.
Counsel for claimant is awarded an additional fee of $750.00 for services on appeal to this court. 33 U.S.C. § 928.
. The Ninth Circuit and the D.C. Circuit have entered similar dismissals in appeals in which the Board was designated as respondent. Westfall & Westfall v. Benefits Review Board, # 73-2578, and Reichard v. Benefits Review Board, # 73-2579 (CA9, Dec. 5, 1973); McCord v. Benefits Review Board, # 74-1948, 514 F. 2d 198 (D.C.Cir.1975).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (17 total)
-
Presley v. Tinsley Maint. Serv., 529 F.2d 433 (5th Cir. 1976)
-
Atl. & Gulf Stevedores, Inc. v. Dir., Off. of Workers' Comp. Programs, United States Dep't of Labor, 542 F.2d 602 (3d Cir. 1976)
-
Dir., Off. of Workers' Comp. Programs, United States Dep't of Labor v. Peabody Coal Co. & Old Republic Ins. Co., 554 F.2d 310 (7th Cir. 1977)
Previewing 3 of 17 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- McCORD v. Benefits Review Bd., 514 F.2d 198 (D.C. Cir. 1975)