# Offshore Food Service, Inc. And Aetna Casualty & Surety Company v. Benefits Review Board

> Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · December 12, 1975 · 524 F.2d 967

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/330754

## Case

- **Full name:** OFFSHORE FOOD SERVICE, INC. and Aetna Casualty & Surety Company, Petitioners, v. BENEFITS REVIEW BOARD Et Al., Respondents
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- **Decided:** December 12, 1975
- **Citations:** 524 F.2d 967; 1975 U.S. App. LEXIS 11471
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Godbold, Dyer, Morgan
- **Cited by:** 25 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/330754

## Opinion text

PER CURIAM:
This is a petition for review of the decision of the Benefits Review Board affirming a compensation order entered by an Administrative Law Judge awarding disability benefits to a longshoreman pursuant to the Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act, 33 U.S.C. § 901 et seq., as extended by the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. § 1333 .
The motion of the Benefits Review Board to dismiss it as a party respondent to this appeal is granted. Neither the statutory provisions for review, 33 U.S.C. § 921 (c), (Supp. II, 1972), nor Rule 15(a), F.R.A.P., requires the Board be a party, nor is its presence as a party necessary to effectuation of orders this court may enter.
1
*968
The findings of the ALJ are supported by substantial evidence considered on the record as a whole. The attorney fees awarded to counsel for the claimant were reasonable. Thus the order of the Board is affirmed.
Counsel for claimant is awarded an additional fee of $750.00 for services on appeal to this court. 33 U.S.C. § 928 .
1
. The Ninth Circuit and the D.C. Circuit have entered similar dismissals in appeals in which the Board was designated as respondent.
Westfall & Westfall v. Benefits Review Board,
# 73-2578, and
Reichard
v.
Benefits Review Board,
# 73-2579 (CA9, Dec. 5, 1973);
McCord v. Benefits Review Board,
# 74-1948, 514 F.2d 198 (D.C.Cir.1975).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/330754. Public record. Not legal advice.