Carlos E. Goff v. Robert H. Finch, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare

Sixth Circuit

Carlos E. Goff v. Robert H. Finch, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare

445 F.2d 852, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8877

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

DecidedJuly 16, 1971

Docket20939_1

StatusPublished

This text of 445 F.2d 852 (Carlos E. Goff v. Robert H. Finch, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carlos E. Goff v. Robert H. Finch, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 445 F.2d 852, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8877 (6th Cir. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order of the District Court, 317 F.Supp. 35, entered August 18, 1970, dismissing the appellant’s application for review of the defendant Secretary’s determination that appellant’s Social Security disability benefits should be reduced proportionately, as provided in 42 U.S.C. § 424a, because of Workmen’s Compensation benefits received by the appellant under the laws of the State of Tennessee.

It appears from the record that the appellant suffered an industrial injury in 1963 for which he was awarded benefits under the laws of Tennessee. He also applied for and received Social Security disability benefits under the provisions of Title 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i) and 423.

In 1964 he was elected to the office of County Tax Assessor and assumed the duties of that office. Thereafter, an order was entered by the Secretary terminating his disability benefits on the ground that because of his employment as, and performance of the duties of County Tax Assessor, he was no longer disabled within the meaning of the applicable statute. An appeal was taken to the District Court from the order terminating the disability benefits, and by order of the District Court the claim was remanded for further consideration. The appeal from the Secretary’s order terminating Social Security benefits, effective August 31, 1965, was ultimately dismissed by the District Court by an order entered March 26, 1968, and no appeal was taken from that order of the District Court.

While the appeal was pending in the District Court, the appellant was awarded Social Security disability benefits based upon an application dated February 1, 1967, subject to proportionate deduction as set forth above. It is from this order that the present appeal is taken. We are of the opinion that the decision of the Secretary terminating disability benefits in 1965, the appeal from which was finally dismissed on review by the District Court, is res judicata and final. Sangster v. Gardner, 374 F.2d 498 (6th Cir. 1967), Domozik v. Cohen, 413 F.2d 5 (3rd Cir. 1969). The appellant’s right to Social Security disability benefits must be limited to those awarded pursuant to the application filed on February 1, 1967.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an order of the District Court, 317 F.Supp. 35, entered August 18, 1970, dismissing the appellant’s application for review of the defendant Secretary’s determination that appellant’s Social Security disability benefits should be reduced proportionately, as provided in 42 U.S.C. § 424a, because of Workmen’s Compensation benefits received by the appellant under the laws of the State of Tennessee.

It appears from the record that the appellant suffered an industrial injury in 1963 for which he was awarded benefits under the laws of Tennessee. He also applied for and received Social Security disability benefits under the provisions of Title 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i) and 423.

In 1964 he was elected to the office of County Tax Assessor and assumed the duties of that office. Thereafter, an order was entered by the Secretary terminating his disability benefits on the ground that because of his employment as, and performance of the duties of County Tax Assessor, he was no longer disabled within the meaning of the applicable statute. An appeal was taken to the District Court from the order terminating the disability benefits, and by order of the District Court the claim was remanded for further consideration. The appeal from the Secretary’s order terminating Social Security benefits, effective August 31, 1965, was ultimately dismissed by the District Court by an order entered March 26, 1968, and no appeal was taken from that order of the District Court.

While the appeal was pending in the District Court, the appellant was awarded Social Security disability benefits based upon an application dated February 1, 1967, subject to proportionate deduction as set forth above. It is from this order that the present appeal is taken. We are of the opinion that the decision of the Secretary terminating disability benefits in 1965, the appeal from which was finally dismissed on review by the District Court, is res judicata and final. Sangster v. Gardner, 374 F.2d 498 (6th Cir. 1967), Domozik v. Cohen, 413 F.2d 5 (3rd Cir. 1969). The appellant’s right to Social Security disability benefits must be limited to those awarded pursuant to the application filed on February 1, 1967.

The judgment of the District Court is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

445 F.2d 852, 1971 U.S. App. LEXIS 8877, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carlos-e-goff-v-robert-h-finch-secretary-of-health-education-and-ca6-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack