Will Witherspoon v. Anthony J. Celebrezze, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare

328 F.2d 311, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 6349
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided February 17, 1964·No. 20883·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this action the claimant appeals from a judgment of the district, court affirming the Secretary’s decision, denying the claimant’s application for-disability benefits. As this Court has-repeatedly held, a mere showing of inability to do his former work will not. entitle a claimant to disability benefits,, unless that work was the only work he’ could perform. Hicks v. Flemming, 5. Cir. 1962, 302 F.2d 470; Celebrezze v. O’Brient, 5 Cir. 1963, 323 F.2d 989. It is. clear from the record that the claimant has failed to show that the work of a coal' miner is the only work which he can. perform, especially in light of the fact that there is medical evidence that at least at the time of his application he had' a residual capacity to perform even manual labor not requiring crawling. Moreover, since the evidence shows that the-claimant, at least on the critical date,, could still perform even hard manuaL labor, it cannot be reasonably said that he’ is disabled. The Secretary’s determination is supported by substantial evidence and the district court was correct in uprholding his decision.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Will Witherspoon v. Anthony J. Celebrezze, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 328 F.2d 311, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 6349 (5th Cir. 1964).

328 F.2d 311 (Will Witherspoon v. Anthony J. Celebrezze, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mounts v. Finch
304 F. Supp. 910 (S.D. West Virginia, 1969)
Bailey v. Finch
300 F. Supp. 232 (W.D. Arkansas, 1969)
Austin v. Celebrezze
230 F. Supp. 256 (S.D. Texas, 1964)