From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hardesty v. Benefits Rev. Bd. of U.S. Dept

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Feb 5, 1986
783 F.2d 138 (8th Cir. 1986)

Opinion

No. 85-2165.

Submitted November 21, 1985.

Decided February 5, 1986.

Rowe W. Snider, Chicago, Ill., for petitioner.

Petition for review of order from Benefits Review Board.

Before ROSS, McMILLIAN and FAGG, Circuit Judges.


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 ALJ'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. Massman 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).


Summaries of

Hardesty v. Benefits Rev. Bd. of U.S. Dept

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit
Feb 5, 1986
783 F.2d 138 (8th Cir. 1986)
Case details for

Hardesty v. Benefits Rev. Bd. of U.S. Dept

Case Details

Full title:HELEN HARDESTY, PETITIONER, v. BENEFITS REVIEW BOARD OF THE UNITED STATES…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

Date published: Feb 5, 1986

Citations

783 F.2d 138 (8th Cir. 1986)

Citing Cases

Danko v. Director, O.W.C.P., U.S. Dept., Labor

When faced with the identical question, the Eighth, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits have concluded that the…

Rich v. Dir., Off. of Workers' Comp. Programs

20 C.F.R. §§ 802.403(b), 802.410(a). The date of filing is not affected by the date of service on Rich or his…