Estepp v. Celebrezze

• Citation: 210 F. Supp. 724
• Decision Date: 03 December 1962
• Docket Number: Civ. A. No. 1116.
• Parties: John A. ESTEPP, Plaintiff, v. Anthony J. CELEBREZZE, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of West Virginia

210 F. Supp. 724

John A. ESTEPP, Plaintiff, v. Anthony J. CELEBREZZE, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, Defendant.

Civ. A. No. 1116.

United States District Court S. D. West Virginia, at Huntington.

December 3, 1962.

Harry F. Thompson, Jr., Huntington, W. Va., for plaintiff.

Harry G. Camper, Jr., U. S. Atty., and George D. Beter, Asst. U. S. Atty., Huntington, W. Va., for defendant.

HARRY E. WATKINS, District Judge.

Plaintiff seeks judicial review of the final decision of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, disallowing his claim for a period of disability and for disability insurance benefits. For the reasons hereinafter stated, it is now found that the determination of the Secretary is supported by substantial evidence and that the motion of the defendant for summary judgment should be granted.

Plaintiff filed an application on May 19, 1959, for disability insurance benefits and to establish a period of disability, in which he alleged that he was unable to work on July 23, 1956, at age 52, because of leg, back and eye trouble.¹ His application was denied initially and, on reconsideration, was again denied by the Bureau of Old Age and Survivors Insurance. On October 10, 1961, a hearing examiner of the Bureau of Hearings and Appeals also found that he was not under a disability within the meaning of the Act, and this decision became the final decision of the Secretary when the Appeals Council denied plaintiff's request for review on January 24, 1962.

Plaintiff met the special "insured status" requirements during the effective period of the application. He last met the special "insured status" requirements on March 31, 1960. Therefore, to be eligible for a period of disability and for monthly insurance benefits under the Act, he had to be disabled on or before May 19, 1959, which was the date of his application for disability insurance benefits and for the establishment of disability.

The evidence shows that plaintiff lost the sight of his left eye as the result of a mine accident in 1936. He next suffered a compound fracture of his right leg in 1950. Because this fracture did not heal properly, he had to undergo surgical treatment, including a bone graft. Plaintiff, however, in due course returned to work in the mines. On July 23, 1956, he suffered a broken back which resulted from a slate fall in the mine in which he was working. As a result of a combination of these injuries plaintiff asserts that he has not been able to resume any gainful employment.

There is abundant medical evidence in this record. It would serve no useful purpose to discuss it in detail here. Suffice it to say that after examining all of the medical and other evidence of record in this case, there is substantial evidence to support the Secretary's conclusion that plaintiff does not have an impairment or impairments of sufficient severity to prevent him from engaging in any substantial gainful activity.

While the evidence seems clear that plaintiff suffered an injury to his left eye resulting in blindness in that eye, there is...