Legal Opinion

Hunter Excavating v. Bartrum

Kentucky Supreme Court

Decided May 19, 2005No. 2004-SC-0485-WCPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

As amended effective July 15, 2002, KRS 342.316(3) sets forth a two-step “consensus” procedure for evaluating x-ray evidence of coal workers’ pneumoconiosis. KRS 342.316(13) creates a presumption that a consensus x-ray classification is correct absent clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. Appealing an order that denied his application for benefits, the claimant asserted that KRS 342.316(3) and the accompanying regulations deprived him of a meaningful opportunity to rebut the consensus, thereby violating his right to due process under the constitutions of the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Jenkins v. McKeithenSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  3. Magic Coal Co. v. FoxKentucky Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Commonwealth v. HowardKentucky Supreme Court · 1998
  5. Harlan Bell Coal Co. And Old Republic Insurance Company v. Dewey LemarCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Vision Mining, Inc. v. GardnerKentucky Supreme Court · 2011
  2. Cain v. Lodestar Energy, Inc.Kentucky Supreme Court · 2009
  3. Durham v. Peabody Coal Co.Kentucky Supreme Court · 2008
  4. Durham v. Peabody Coal Co.Kentucky Supreme Court · 2008
  5. Vision Mining, Inc. v. GardnerKentucky Supreme Court · 2011

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

Powered by the Exa API