W.C., PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,
v.
OTIS R. BOWEN, SECRETARY, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
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 denied the petition for rehearing and rejected the suggestion for rehearing en banc, amending its prior opinion.
This is an order concerning a petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing en banc following a prior opinion. The court details specific amendm…
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 Appeals Council cases and more on FLexlaw
The panel has voted to deny the petition for rehearing, and Judges Browning and Beezer have voted to reject the suggestion for a rehearing en banc.
The full court has been advised of the suggestion for an en banc hearing, and no judge of the court has requested a vote on it. Fed.R.App.P. 35(b).
The petition for rehearing is denied and the suggestion for a rehearing en banc is rejected.
The opinion filed on January 13, 1987, 807 F. 2d 1502 (9th Cir.), is amended as follows:
Page 1505, first column, line 23: Correct to read administrative law judges and the Appeals Council. •
Page 1506, first column, line 5, insert: Furthermore, the effect of the program on the Appeals Council’s impartiality militates against reinstating their decisions. See Barry v. Heckler, 620 F.Supp. 779, 782 (N.D.Cal.1985).
Change the next sentence to read: We agree with the district court that the ALJ’s decisions must be reinstated and the claimants provided disability benefits.
Page 1506, footnote 8: Delete the words: previously awarded.
Page 1505, first column, last paragraph, starting with “Here, claimants”: Delete the paragraph.
Page 1505, second column, line 25, add: Cf. Stoddard Lumber Co., Inc. v. Marshall, 627 F. 2d 984, 986-88 (9th Cir.1980) (inspection procedure not an exercise of delegated legislative power).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Barry v. Bowen, 825 F.2d 1324 (9th Cir. 1987)
-
Nash v. Bowen, 869 F.2d 675 (2d Cir. 1989)
-
C.M. Higbee v. Louis W. Sullivan, M.D., 935 F.2d 1038 (9th Cir. 1991)
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- In re Establishment Inspection of Stoddard Lumber Co., Inc. v. Marshall, 627 F.2d 984 (9th Cir. 1980)
- W.C. v. Bowen, 807 F.2d 1502 (9th Cir. 1987)