Earlene d.stowe v. Elliot l.richardson, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare

Fifth Circuit

Earlene d.stowe v. Elliot l.richardson, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare

466 F.2d 510, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 7475

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided September 20, 1972·No. 72-2222·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellant sought disability benefits under the Social Security Act. The district court affirmed the denial of relief by the Secretary. We find no error.

The pertinent findings of the Secretary were supported by substantial evidence, 42 U.S.C.A., section 405(g). There was no denial of procedural or substantive due process. There was no application of an incorrect legal standard. The report of the Vocational Rehabilitation expert was admissible under the teachings of Richardson v. Perales, 1971, 402 U.S. 389, 91 S.Ct. 1420, 28 L.Ed.2d 842.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellant sought disability benefits under the Social Security Act. The district court affirmed the denial of relief by the Secretary. We find no error.

The pertinent findings of the Secretary were supported by substantial evidence, 42 U.S.C.A., section 405(g). There was no denial of procedural or substantive due process. There was no application of an incorrect legal standard. The report of the Vocational Rehabilitation expert was admissible under the teachings of Richardson v. Perales, 1971, 402 U.S. 389, 91 S.Ct. 1420, 28 L.Ed.2d 842.

Affirmed.

Earlene d.stowe v. Elliot l.richardson, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 466 F.2d 510, 1972 U.S. App. LEXIS 7475 (5th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

466 F.2d 510 (Earlene d.stowe v. Elliot l.richardson, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related