HELEN HARDESTY, PETITIONER,
v.
BENEFITS REVIEW BOARD OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS; PEABODY COAL COMPANY; AND OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE COMPANY, RESPONDENTS

8th Cir. | 1986-02-05
No. 85-2165
Before ROSS, McMILLIAN and FAGG, Circuit Judges.
783 F.2d 138 United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (1986) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that it lacked jurisdiction to review the Board's order because the petition for review was filed in the wrong circuit and beyond the statutory 60-day deadline.


Facts & Procedural History

Helen Hardesty sought review of a denial of Black Lung Benefits. The Board affirmed the denial, and she filed a petition for review in this court, whi…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Helen Hardesty prosecuted her late husband’s claim for benefits under the Black Lung Benefits Act, 30 U.S.C. §§ 901-945 (as amended). An administrative law judge denied the claim, and the Benefits Review Board of the United States Department of Labor affirmed the AU’s decision on July 29, 1985. On September 30, 1985, Mrs. Hardesty filed a petition with this court for review of the Board’s order. Two of the respondents have filed a motion to dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction.

Under 33 U.S.C. § 921(c), made applicable to the Black Lung Benefits Act by 30 U.S.C. § 932(a) (as amended), final orders of the Benefits Review Board are reviewable “in the United States court of appeals for the circuit in which the injury occurred, by filing in such court within sixty days following the issuance of such Board order a written petition praying that the order be modified or set aside” (emphasis added); the court obtains jurisdiction when the Board files its record of the proceedings with the court.

The record before us indicates that the alleged injury occurred in Indiana, which lies in the Seventh Circuit. “Section 921(c) has consistently been held to be a jurisdictional provision, not a venue provision.” Hon v. Director, Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs, 699 F. 2d 441, 443 n. 1 (8th Cir.1983). See, e.g., Bassett v. Mass-man Construction Co., 120 F. 2d 230, 234 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 314 U.S. 648, 62 S.Ct. 92, 86 L.Ed. 520 (1941). This court therefore lacks jurisdiction, and transfer of the case to the Seventh Circuit does not appear to be “in the interest of justice” under 28 U.S.C. § 1631 (1982), because the petition was untimely filed on the sixty-third day after the Board issued its order. A final order of the Benefits Review Board is not reviewable by a court of appeals unless the petition for review is filed within the sixty-day period provided in section 921(c). Pittston Stevedoring Corp. v. Dellaventura, 544 F. 2d 35, 42-44 (2d Cir.1976), aff'd on other grounds sub nom. Northeast Marine Terminal Co. v. Caputo, 432 U.S. 249, 97 S.Ct. 2348, 53 L.Ed.2d 320 (1977).

Accordingly, the petition is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. 8th Cir.R. 12(b).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw