20 C.F.R. § 725.308
Time limits for filing claims
(a) A claim for benefits filed under this part by, or on behalf of, a miner shall be filed within three years after a medical determination of total disability due to pneumoconiosis which has been communicated to the miner or a person responsible for the care of the miner, or within three years after the date of enactment of the Black Lung Benefits Reform Act of 1977, whichever is later. There is no time limit on the filing of a claim by the survivor of a miner.
(b) There shall be a rebuttable presumption that every claim for benefits is timely filed. The time limits in this section are mandatory and may not be waived or tolled except upon a showing of extraordinary circumstances.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 36
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1986–2025 · leading case: Big Horn Coal Co. v. Sadler Ex Rel. Sadler, 924 F.3d 1317 (10th Cir. 2019).
Big Horn Coal Co. v. Sadler Ex Rel. Sadler, 924 F.3d 1317 (10th Cir. 2019). “In interpreting this statute of limitations, the Secretary of the Department of Labor issued 20 C.F.R. § 725.308 (c) (2010), which provides that the time limits in section 932(f)"are mandatory and may not be waived or tolled except upon a showing of extraordinary circumstances.”
Island Creek Coal Co. v. Manford Henline Dir., Off. of Workers' Comp. Programs, 456 F.3d 421 (4th Cir. 2006). “Section 932(f) is implemented by 20 C.F.R. § 725.308 (a), promulgated by the Department of Labor, which regulation provides, in relevant part: A claim for benefits filed under this part by, or on behalf of, a miner shall be filed within three years after a medical determination…”
Consolidation Coal Co. v. Billy D. Williams Dir., Off. of Workers' Comp. Programs, United States Dep't of Labor, 453 F.3d 609 (4th Cir. 2006). “Lebovitz’s report under 20 C.F.R. § 725.308 . The ALJ provisionally denied the motion with leave to renew the motion in post-hearing submissions.”
Westmoreland Coal Co. v. Herskel Stallard, 876 F.3d 663 (4th Cir. 2017). “§ 932 (f); see also 20 C.F.R. § 725.308 (a). Next, in light of Stallard’s long career in the mining industry, the ALJ applied a statutory presumption that Stallard’s work in the mines caused or substantially contributed to any disabling lung disease he experienced.”
Zurich Am. Ins. Grp. v. Duncan Ex Rel. Duncan, 889 F.3d 293 (6th Cir. 2018). “§ 932 (f)(1) ; 20 C.F.R. § 725.308 (a). There is "a rebuttable presumption that every claim for benefits is timely filed.”
Arch of Kentucky, Inc. v. Dir., Off. of Workers' Comp., 556 F.3d 472 (6th Cir. 2009). “20 C.F.R. § 725.308 (c). Title 30 U.S.C. § 932 (f)(1) provides, “Any claim for benefits by a miner under this section shall be filed within three years after .”
Energy West Mining Co. v. Oliver, 555 F.3d 1211 (10th Cir. 2009). “has been communicated to [him],” 20 C.F.R. § 725.308 (a), and there is a presumption that all black lung claims are timely filed, 20 C.”
Peabody Coal Co. v. Dir., Off. of Workers' Comp. Programs, 48 F. App'x 140 (6th Cir. 2002). “” The provision’s implementing regulation, 20 C.F.R. § 725.308 (a), further provides: A claim for benefits filed under this part by, or on behalf of, a miner shall be filed within three years after a medical determination of total disability due to pneumoconiosis which has been…”
Peabody Coal Co. v. Dir., Off. of Workers' Comp. Programs, 718 F.3d 590 (6th Cir. 2013). “” 20 C.F.R. § 725.308 (a); see Chevron, U.S.”
Tennessee Consol. Coal Co. v. Jack Kirk & Dir., Off. of Workers' Comp. Programs, United States Dep't of Labor, 264 F.3d 602 (6th Cir. 2001). “§ 932 (f); 20 C.F.R. § 725.308 (a). Since the current claim was filed in March 1992, it is the employer’s burden to rebut the presumption of timeliness by showing that a medical determination satisfying the statutory definition was communicated to Kirk prior to March 1989.”
Bethenergy Mines, Inc. v. Cunningham, 104 F. App'x 881 (4th Cir. 2004). “§ 932 (f); 20 C.F.R. § 725.308 (a) ("[a] claim" must be filed "within three years after a medical determination of total disability due to pneumoconiosis which has been communicated to the miner.”
Westmoreland Coal Co. v. Amick, 123 F. App'x 525 (4th Cir. 2004). “” 20 C.F.R. § 725.308 (a). Although Westmoreland argued that Amick’s claim was untimely, the ALJ made no explicit findings regarding the timeliness of Amick’s claim.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.