Legal Opinion

Sipple v. Califano

District Court, S.D. West Virginia

Decided September 6, 1978No. Civ. A. 77-3132-HPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM ORDER

HADEN, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on motion of the defendant to dismiss. The defendant asserts in his motion that plaintiff failed to commence this action, seeking review of a denial of black lung benefits, within the sixty day limitation period prescribed in 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), § 405(g) being made applicable to black lung claims by the provisions of § 413(b) of the Federal Coal Mine, Health and Safety Act of 1969, as amended. 30 U.S.C. § 923(b).

The facts, as established by the record in this ease, portray a sequence of events in which it would seem that…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Weinberger v. SalfiSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. Fayne W. Artrip v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary of Health, Education and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1978
  3. Funderburk v. CalifanoDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina · 1977
  4. Phillips v. MathewsDistrict Court, W.D. Virginia · 1976

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. John W. Biron v. Patricia Roberts Harris, Secretary of Health, Education and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1982
  2. Janet Belczyk Cunningham v. Railroad Retirement BoardCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2004
  3. Cleto Rivera, Jr. v. Railroad Retirement BoardCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
  4. Cunningham v. RRRBCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2004

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API