Appeals court hears W.Va. coal miners’ black lung lawsuit |

Appeals court hears W.Va. coal miners’ black lung lawsuit

The Associated Press

RICHMOND, Va. — A federal appeals court has heard arguments in a lawsuit filed by the families of West Virginia coal miners who were denied benefits for black lung disease after a Johns Hopkins Health System doctor insisted their X-rays did not show the disease.

A judge last year dismissed the lawsuit, finding that the doctor had immunity under Maryland and federal law.

During arguments before a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday, the families’ lawyer said Dr. Paul Wheeler and the Johns Hopkins black lung unit “believed they were above the law” when Wheeler disregarded federal regulations on how to interpret X-rays to diagnose black lung disease.

A lawyer for Johns Hopkins said the case “begins and ends” with witness immunity, which shields witnesses from later civil liability.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.