![10th Circuit Court of Appeals rams The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals building in Denver, also known as the Byron White building.](https://www.lawweekcolorado.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Byron-White-_preview-696x409.jpeg)
![10th Circuit Court of Appeals rams The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals building in Denver, also known as the Byron White building.](https://www.lawweekcolorado.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Byron-White-_preview-696x409.jpeg)
Editor’s Note: Law Week Colorado edits court opinion summaries for style and, when necessary, length.
Sunnyside Coal Company v. Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs
In 2013, Ronald Fossat, a coal miner, filed a claim for benefits under the Black Lung Benefits Act. After years of his claim trudging through the administrative review process, he was awarded benefits by an administrative law judge on Jan. 21, 2021.
His former employer, Sunnyside Coal Co., appealed that award to the U.S. Department of Labor Benefits Review Board, which affirmed the ALJ’s decision and order.
Sunnyside petitioned the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals for review. The director of the Office of Workers’ Compensation Programs at the U.S. Department of Labor joined Fossat as a respondent.
Sunnyside made three arguments to support its request that the 10th Circuit remand the case with instructions to deny benefits to Fossat. First, it argued that the agency’s interpretation of the relevant section of the BLBA was erroneous. Second, it argued the Department of Labor’s “pilot program,” which allows for a supplemental medical report following the statutorily mandated pulmonary examination of a miner/claimant at government expense, “offends the law’s plain text,” is “employed one-sidedly to aim claimants’ quests for benefits,” and does “violence to employers’ rights.” Third, Sunnyside argued that the ALJ’s medical merits analysis was flawed.
The 10th Circuit found that Fossat proved he was employed for 15 years or more in underground coal mines, and found that the legislative purpose of the BLBA supports its reading of the statute, which in turn renders a decision in favor of Fossat on this question.
Sunnyside contested whether Fossat was totally disabled due to pneumoconiosis arising out of his coal mine employment. The ALJ concluded Fossat was totally disabled based on the arterial blood gas studies and medical opinions from two doctors.
The 10th Circuit found the ALJ correctly applied the burden of establishing total disability on a claimant, when he determined that all the arterial blood gas studies produced qualifying values, multiple physicians provided the opinion that Fossat was unable to work and a doctor opined that Fossat was disabled from work due to his respiratory condition.
It also concluded that the ALJ’s finding that Fossat was disabled was supported by substantial evidence, and the remainder of Sunnyside’s argument asking it to reweigh the evidence was a task beyond its limited role.
The 10th Circuit denied the petition for review.