Canales v. Sullivan

Second Circuit

Canales v. Sullivan

947 F.2d 45, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 26164

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided October 28, 1991·No. Nos. 1507, 1508, Dockets 90-6144, 90-6306·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

LUMBARD, Circuit Judge:

The Secretary has petitioned for rehearing. He asks us to vacate our opinion which was filed on June 27, 1991 936 F.2d 755 and remand the case to him for reconsideration in light of Social Security Ruling SSR-91-5p, 56 Fed.Reg. 29,971, which was issued on July 1, 1991, four days after we filed our opinion. The new ruling permits claimants to raise mental incapacity as good cause for missing the deadline to request review of the denial of social security benefits. We have considered the petition and the Secretary’s brief, the brief of the plaintiff Dolores Canales, and the amicus brief of the Legal Aid Society.

We see no need to vacate our opinion. Of course, the district court in its discretion may remand the case to the Secretary. In view of the lapse of time since the claims were first asserted, control of further pro[46] ceedings by the district court assures an earlier disposition on the merits.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

LUMBARD, Circuit Judge:

The Secretary has petitioned for rehearing. He asks us to vacate our opinion which was filed on June 27, 1991 936 F.2d 755 and remand the case to him for reconsideration in light of Social Security Ruling SSR-91-5p, 56 Fed.Reg. 29,971, which was issued on July 1, 1991, four days after we filed our opinion. The new ruling permits claimants to raise mental incapacity as good cause for missing the deadline to request review of the denial of social security benefits. We have considered the petition and the Secretary’s brief, the brief of the plaintiff Dolores Canales, and the amicus brief of the Legal Aid Society.

We see no need to vacate our opinion. Of course, the district court in its discretion may remand the case to the Secretary. In view of the lapse of time since the claims were first asserted, control of further pro[46] ceedings by the district court assures an earlier disposition on the merits.

Canales v. Sullivan, 947 F.2d 45, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 26164 (2d Cir. 1991).

Pincite

947 F.2d 45 (Canales v. Sullivan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related