Hyde v. Celebrezze, Civ. A. No. 697-F.

• Decision Date: 30 November 1962
• Docket Number: Civ. A. No. 697-F.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of West Virginia
• Parties: Jess P. HYDE, Plaintiff, v. Anthony J. CELEBREZZE, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Defendant.

210 F. Supp. 768

Jess P. HYDE, Plaintiff, v. Anthony J. CELEBREZZE, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Defendant.

Civ. A. No. 697-F.

United States District Court N. D. West Virginia, at Fairmont.

November 30, 1962.

Roderick A. Devison, Fairmont, W. Va., for plaintiff.

Robert E. Maxwell, U. S. Atty., Fairmont, W. Va., for defendant.

HARRY E. WATKINS, Chief Judge.

Plaintiff seeks judicial review of the final decision of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, holding that he was not entitled to disability insurance benefits or to a period of disability under Sections 223(a) and 216(i) of the Social Security Act, as amended. For the reasons hereinafter stated, it is now found that the determination of the Secretary is supported by substantial evidence and that his decision is affirmed.

Plaintiff filed an application for a period of disability and for disability insurance benefits on June 6, 1960, in which he alleged that he became unable to work on November 28, 1959, at age 53, because of lung trouble. His application was denied initially and, on reconsideration, was again denied by the Bureau of Old Age and Survivors Insurance. On November 21, 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 31, 1962.

Plaintiff met the special earnings requirements during the effective period of the application, and still continues to meet such requirements through December 31, 1964. Based on this application filed on June 6, 1960, the evidence must establish that claimant was under a disability as defined in the Act beginning on or before September 1, 1960, for entitlement to disability insurance benefits, and on or before September 6, 1960, for establishment of a period of disability.

The reports of Drs. Coffindoffer, Garofoli, and Allen are the only medical evidence pertaining specifically to the period between June 6, 1960, and September 6, 1960. The first two doctors mentioned above concluded that plaintiff was precluded from performing any work, but it is significant that their reports show no objective medical findings and tests. On the contrary, Dr. Allen's report shows that he conducted numerous clinical tests and the report contains, in detail, the results of his physical examination and the clinical tests which h...