Stevenson v. Ribicoff

Second Circuit

Stevenson v. Ribicoff

297 F.2d 811

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided November 8, 1961·No. No. 36, Docket 26712·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm in open court for the reasons stated in Judge Kaufman’s opinion, 200 F.Supp. 705, as there was substantial evidence in the record to support the administrative determination of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare denying the plaintiff’s application for old age benefits under 42 U.S.C.A. § 402(a). See Walker v. Altmeyer, 137 F.2d 531, 533-34 (2 Cir.1943); Poss v. Ribicoff, 289 F.2d 10 (2 Cir.1961); Gooding v. Willard, 209 F.2d 913, 916 (2 Cir.1954) ; Adams v. Flemming, 276 F.2d 901, 903 (2 Cir. 1960); Barron v. Ribicoff, 295 F.2d 432 (4 Cir.1961).

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm in open court for the reasons stated in Judge Kaufman’s opinion, 200 F.Supp. 705, as there was substantial evidence in the record to support the administrative determination of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare denying the plaintiff’s application for old age benefits under 42 U.S.C.A. § 402(a). See Walker v. Altmeyer, 137 F.2d 531, 533-34 (2 Cir.1943); Poss v. Ribicoff, 289 F.2d 10 (2 Cir.1961); Gooding v. Willard, 209 F.2d 913, 916 (2 Cir.1954) ; Adams v. Flemming, 276 F.2d 901, 903 (2 Cir. 1960); Barron v. Ribicoff, 295 F.2d 432 (4 Cir.1961).

Stevenson v. Ribicoff, 297 F.2d 811 (2d Cir. 1961).

Pincite

297 F.2d 811 (Stevenson v. Ribicoff) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related