Green v. Gardner

Decision Date19 March 1968
Docket NumberNo. 24993.,24993.
Citation391 F.2d 606
PartiesRoy A. GREEN, Appellant, v. John W. GARDNER, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Appellee.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

Philip S. Kouri, Wichita Falls, Tex., for appellant.

Martha Joe Stroud, Asst. U. S. Atty., Dallas, Tex., for appellee.

Before RIVES, GEWIN and THORNBERRY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The appellant applied for a period of disability and disability insurance benefits under Title II, Section 216 (i) and 223 of the Social Security Act as amended, 42 U.S.C.A. 416(i) and 423, in which he briefly described his impairment as "nerves & arthritis & heart murmur." Upon hearing, the claimant, represented by counsel, testified at length. There was considerable additional evidence, including some six or seven medical reports and certificates of physicians who differed widely in their opinions. The hearing examiner made elaborate and detailed findings, as a result of which he decided that the claimant is not entitled to have a period of disability established or to disability insurance benefits. The Appeals Council affirmed the hearing examiner's decision. The district court reviewed the decision pursuant to section 205(g) of the Act, 42 U.S.C.A. § 405(g). Upon such review it is provided that, "The findings of the Secretary as to any fact, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be conclusive." The district court found that substantial evidence supports the findings and determinations of the Secretary and affirmed the decision. After careful consideration of the record on appeal, including the administrative transcript, we find that the findings are supported by substantial evidence and that the Secretary applied the proper legal standards. Those are the two basic questions to be decided on this appeal. Gardner v. Smith, 5 Cir. 1966, 368 F.2d 77. The judgment is therefore

Affirmed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Richardson v. Perales
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • 3 Mayo 1971
    ...191 (CA5 1964); Dodsworth v. Celebrezze, 349 F.2d 312, 313 314 (CA5 1965); Bridges v. Gardner, 368 F.2d 86, 89 (CA5 1966); Green v. Gardner, 391 F.2d 606 (CA5 1968); Martin v. Finch, 415 F.2d 793, 794 (CA5 1969); Breaux v. Finch, 421 F.2d 687, 689 (CA5 1970); Phillips v. Celebrezze, 330 F.2......
  • Bonilla v. Richardson, SA-71-CA-64.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Texas
    • 20 Marzo 1972
    ...applied the proper legal standards. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (1970); Williams v. Finch, 440 F.2d 613, 615 (5th Cir. 1971); Green v. Gardner, 391 F.2d 606, 607 (5th Cir. 1968). "Substantial evidence" is "more than a mere scintilla. It means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept ......
  • Tietze v. Richardson
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Texas
    • 8 Mayo 1972
    ...in the record are supported by substantial evidence and whether proper legal standards were applied, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); Green v. Gardner, 391 F.2d 606 (5th Cir. 1968). Substantial evidence is defined as that amount of relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to sup......
  • Pate v. Richardson
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Texas
    • 12 Julio 1971
    ...in the record, are supported by substantial evidence and whether proper legal standards were applied. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g); Green v. Gardner, 391 F.2d 606 (5th Cir. 1968). Substantial evidence is defined as that amount of relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to supp......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT