McCunney v. Gardner, 16115.
| Citation | 374 F.2d 110 |
| Decision Date | 24 February 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 16115.,16115. |
| Parties | Victoria McCUNNEY, Joan McCunney, Gwendolyn McCunney and Patricia McCunney by Anna McCunney, Appellants, v. John W. GARDNER, Secretary of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
Martin J. Resnick, Philadelphia, Pa., for appellants.
Merna B. Marshall, Asst. U. S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa. (Drew J. T. O'Keefe, U. S. Atty., Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for appellee.
Before HASTIE, FORMAN and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The appellant is an unsuccessful claimant of social security benefits for her children. The district court granted summary judgment denying the claimant judicial relief. The record shows that the claimant did not within the time required by law take the prescribed steps to obtain a full administrative hearing upon or review of the merits of her claim. Thereafter, the appellee's denial of a subsequent petition to reopen the matter was not an appealable order. Filice v. Celebrezze, 9th Cir., 1963, 319 F.2d 443. In the circumstances the courts cannot properly assist her.
The judgment will be affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fyfe v. Finch
...the Third Circuit has held that a determination not to reopen a prior determination is not a court reviewable decision. McCunney v. Gardner, 374 F.2d 110 (3d Cir. 1967). The United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania does not have the power and the authority and j......
-
Wright v. Weinberger
...on the first application is not an appealable order, citing Stuckey v. Weinberger, 488 F.2d 904, 911 (9th Cir. 1973); McCunney v. Gardner, 374 F.2d 110 (3d Cir. 1967); and Filice v. Celebrezze, 319 F.2d 443 (9th Cir. It is unnecessary, however, to decide this jurisdictional issue because it......
-
Burge v. Richardson
...to review within the meaning of § 405(g) as several cases have held. Brockman v. Finch, 418 F.2d 116 (9th Cir. 1969); McCunney v. Gardner, 374 F.2d 110 (3rd Cir. 1967); Filice v. Celebrezze, 319 F.2d 443 (9th Cir. 1963); Hobby v. Hodges, 215 F.2d 754 (10th Cir. 1954). Consequently, the deni......
-
Shultz v. Gardner
...decision of the Secretary which is not reviewable. In the circumstances, the court cannot properly assist plaintiff. McCunney v. Gardner, 374 F.2d 110 (3d Cir. 1967); Moore v. Celebrezze, 252 F.Supp. 593 (E.D.Pa.1966), aff'd 376 F.2d 850 (3d Cir. 1967); Phillip v. Ribicoff, 211 F.Supp. 510 ......