Ola Mae Hampton (on behalf of and widow of Edgar Hampton) v. ANR Coal Company, LLC (Board decision, May 23, 2018)

BRB interlocutory order. This unpublished decision is not precedent. Both claims remanded for further proceedings. A final Board decision ordinarily becomes final 60 days after issuance unless a timely petition for judicial review or Board reconsideration is filed under 20 C.F.R. § 802.406. A party may request Board reconsideration within 30 days under 20 C.F.R. § 802.407.

Plain-English summary

Ola Mae Hampton pursued her late husband's black lung claim and her own survivor claim. The Board asked the parties whether both cases should return to the judge for reconsideration of prior procedural and substantive actions. The program director and employer agreed. The Board remanded both claims for a new merits decision; entitlement remains pending.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 20 C.F.R. §§ 802.205, 802.405(a).
• Outcome: Both claims remanded for further proceedings.
• Key point: The judge must reconsider prior actions and issue a new merits decision.

Full text (DOL BRB public release)

U.S. Department of Labor
Benefits Review Board
200 Constitution Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20210-0001

BRB Nos. 17-0525 BLA and 17-0526 BLA
Case Nos. 2008-BLA-05389 and 2012-BLA-06075

OLA MAE HAMPTON
)
(o/b/o and Widow of EDGAR HAMPTON)
)
)
Claimant-Respondent
)
)
v. )
)
ANR COAL COMPANY, LLC, formerly
) DATE ISSUED: 05/23/2018
ENTERPRISE COAL COMPANY
)
)
and
)
)
OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE
)
CORPORATION
)
)
Employer/Carrier-
)
Petitioners
)
)
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS’
)
COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED
)
STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
)
)
Party-in-Interest
) ORDER

On May 7, 2018, the Board ordered the parties to show cause within ten (10) days of receipt of the Board’s Order why this case should not be remanded for the administrative law judge to reconsider the substantive and procedural actions previously taken and to issue a decision on the merits accordingly. The Director, Office of Workers’ Compensatio n Programs, responds that she does not object to the case being remanded. Employer/car r ier responds and agrees that remand is necessary. Claimant has not filed a response to the Order to Show Cause.

Upon consideration of the positions of the parties, we agree that under these circumstances the most expeditious course of action is to remand this case to the administrative law judge to promptly reconsider the substantive and procedural actions previously taken and to issue a decision on the merits accordingly. 20 C.F.R. §802.405(a). Any party adversely affected by the administrative law judge’s decision may file a new appeal with the Board within thirty (30) days of the date that the decision is filed with the district director. 20 C.F.R. §802.205.

Accordingly, this case is remanded to the administrative law judge for further proceedings consistent with this Order.

BETTY JEAN HALL, Chief
Administrative Appeals Judge

JUDITH S. BOGGS
Administrative Appeals Judge

JONATHAN ROLFE
Administrative Appeals Judge