LEILA J. GOODMAN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
ELLIOT L. RICHARDSON, SECRETARY OF HEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFARE, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed the denial of disability benefits, finding substantial evidence supported the Secretary's decision and the hearing was fair.
Appellant applied for disability benefits but was denied by the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare. The District Court affirmed the Secretary'…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Right To Counsel In Administrative Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
This is an appeal from an order of the District Court which affirmed a final decision of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, denying appellant’s application for disability benefits under 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i), 423(d), as amended. We affirm.
Appellant contends that there was insufficient evidence to support the Secretary’s denial of benefits and that she was not accorded a fair hearing at the administrative level because she was not represented by counsel.
The hearing examiner concluded that appellant was not disabled prior or at the time that she last met the insured status requirement under the Act. The evidence is substantial to warrant that conclusion and the District Court so found. The function of the reviewing court is limited. It is not to reweigh the evidence or substitute its judgment for that of the Secretary. Its role is to determine if the record contains substantial evidence to support the Secretary’s decision. Richardson v. Richardson, 5 Cir., 1970, 437 F. 2d 109; Cooper v. Finch, 5 Cir., 1970, 433 F. 2d 315; Brown v. Finch, 5 Cir., 1970, 429 F. 2d 80; Rome v. Finch, 5 Cir., 1969, 409 F. 2d 1329.
There is no merit to appellant’s contention that she was not given a fair hearing because of lack of counsel. The record shows, and the District Court found, that the applicant was fully informed of her right to obtain counsel. She decided, however, to forego this right and so indicated at the hearing. Moreover, the record shows that claimant was given a full and fair hearing and that she suffered no prejudice by the absence of counsel. See Cross v. Finch, 5 Cir., 1970, 427 F. 2d 406, 409.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (15 total)
-
Johnson v. Harris, 612 F.2d 993 (5th Cir. 1980)
-
Ware v. Schweiker, 651 F.2d 408 (5th Cir. 1981)
-
Mozelle Clark v. Schweiker, 652 F.2d 399 (5th Cir. 1981)
Previewing 3 of 15 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Isbell Enters., Inc. v. Citizens Cas. Co. OF NEW York, 431 F.2d 409 (5th Cir. 1970)
- Brown v. Finch, 429 F.2d 80 (5th Cir. 1970)
- Rome v. Finch, 409 F.2d 1329 (5th Cir. 1969)
- Cross v. Finch, 427 F.2d 406 (5th Cir. 1970)
- Richardson v. Elliott L. Richardson, 437 F.2d 109 (5th Cir. 1970)
- Hulon Cooper v. Finch, 433 F.2d 315 (5th Cir. 1970)