Byrd v. Gardner, 22738.
| Decision Date | 18 March 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 22738.,22738. |
| Citation | 358 F.2d 291 |
| Parties | Walton J. BYRD, Jr., Appellant, v. John W. GARDNER, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Williams S. Murphy, Lucedale, Miss., for appellant.
E. Donald Strange, Asst. U. S. Atty., Jackson, Miss., Florence Wagman Roisman, David L. Rose, Attys., Dept. of Justice, John W. Douglas, Asst. Atty. Gen., Robert E. Hauberg, U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., for appellee.
Before RIVES and GEWIN, Circuit Judges, and ALLGOOD, District Judge.
Appellant, Walton J. Byrd, Jr., brings this appeal from an adverse decision of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, Southern Division.
This matter was before the District Court pursuant to the provisions of Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. § 405(g), seeking review of a final decision of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, holding that appellant was not entitled to a period of disability or disability insurance benefits under the provisions of Sections 216(i) and 223 of the Social Security Act, as amended 42 U.S.C.A. § § 416(i) and 423, for which he filed an application on May 21, 1962.
In his application for a period of disability and for disability insurance benefits, Mr. Byrd stated that his impairments were, "Back injury and high blood pressure."
On March 8, 1965, the District Court affirmed the decision of the Secretary and this appeal followed.
A careful review of the record convinces the court that the decision of the Secretary is supported by substantial evidence. Therefore, the judgment of the District Court should be affirmed. However, it appears to the court that appellant may be entitled to benefits under Section 303(a) of Public Law 89-97, July 30, 1965, which amends Section 216 (i) and 223 of the Social Security Act by substituting for the requirement that an individual's impairment must be expected to be of long-continued and indefinite duration or to result in death, a new requirement that he have been under a disability which can be expected to result in death or which has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than twelve calendar months. A period of disability by reason of this change may be established pursuant to the provisions of Section 303(f) of the Public Law for periods of disability beginning as early as October 1941 but benefits are payable only beginning ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Bohms v. Gardner, 18605.
...applicable to this case (Pub.L. 89-97, § 303(f) (1), 79 Stat. 368); Nichols v. Gardner, 361 F.2d 963, 967 (8 Cir. 1966); Byrd v. Gardner, 358 F.2d 291 (5 Cir. 1966); Sergeant v. Gardner, 361 F.2d 334 (6 Cir. 1966); and (d) when it felt that an improper standard may have been applied by the ......
-
Morgan v. Gardner
...can be found in the record to support that statutory conclusion. That has been done in this case in all respects as required by Byrd v. Gardner, 358 F.2d 291. That administrative finding and conclusion is supported by substantial evidence in this The motion of the defendant for a summary ju......
-
Hope v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Civ. A. No. 6404.
...hearing examiner's decision is finalized, is good cause to remand to the Secretary to consider such change in the law. Byrd v. Gardner, 358 F.2d 291 (5th Cir. 1966); Sergeant v. Gardner, 361 F.2d 334 (6th Cir. 1966); Nichols v. Gardner, 361 F.2d 963, 967 (8th Cir. 1966); see generally, Bohm......
-
Hamm v. Richardson
...can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months." 2 Rome v. Finch, 409 F.2d 1329 (5 Cir. 1969); Byrd v. Gardner, 358 F.2d 291 (5 Cir. 1966). 3 Mullins v. Cohen, 408 F.2d 39 (6 Cir. 1969); Daniel v. Gardner, 390 F.2d 32 (5 Cir. 1968); Hicks v. Gardner, 393 F.2d 299......