Moore v. Finch
Decision Date | 01 December 1969 |
Docket Number | No. 13222.,13222. |
Citation | 418 F.2d 1224 |
Parties | Charles E. MOORE, Appellant, v. Robert H. FINCH, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Appellee. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit |
James M. Haviland, Princeton, W. Va. (Naomi Weintraub, Bluefield, W. Va., on brief), for appellant.
George D. Beter, Asst. U. S. Atty. (Milton J. Ferguson, U. S. Atty., on brief), for appellee.
Before BRYAN, WINTER and CRAVEN, Circuit Judges.
Social Security benefits were denied Charles E. Moore by the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare on the finding that he had not become disabled, within the meaning of the Act, §§ 216(i) and 223, 42 U.S.C. §§ 416(i) and 423, before his insurance coverage expired on September 30, 1960. On review, the Federal Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, clearly charting the apt legal principles, affirmed, believing the finding was supported by substantial evidence. Social Security Act § 205(g), 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Moore v. Finch (S.D.W.Va. 1968). Nevertheless, we must vacate the Court's order and remand the cause to the Secretary for a rehearing because of the Hearing Examiner's errors in ruling on the evidence.
Moore's claimed disability was diagnosed in 1966 and 1967 as a psychoneurotic anxiety reaction preventing him from engaging "in any substantial gainful activity". His demand was supported by his wife and other witnesses, all of whom gave evidence in regard to his odd behavior and habits during the period from 1958 to 1967.
The Secretary now concedes that "the psychiatric examinations in 1966 and 1967 show that at that time claimant's mental and emotional status was impaired." However, relying on medical reports from 1958 and 1963, he emphatically denies, as he has at each stage of this proceeding, that the impairment existed prior to September 30, 1960 — the end of the insurance coverage period.
A vocational expert called by the Secretary testified that jobs on which, in her opinion, Moore could work were available not too far away at the cut-off date. Nevertheless, she said further that if Moore's 1966-67 weakness of mind had developed before September 30, 1960, he would have been unable, to perform any substantial work.
Chronicling Moore's history, the Examiner related that he was born in 1922, completed the seventh grade and is presently able to read and write. His first employment was in the timber industry. Afterwards he labored in coal mines until sometime in 1957. In the early 1960s, he held a job under the Aid to Families with Dependent Children of the Unemployed program of West Virginia.
Concluding, the Examiner denied Moore's claim. He found that on September 30, 1960, Moore was "capable of engaging in substantial gainful work within his reasonable work area in jobs * * * which did not require strenuous physical labor, did not require heavy lifting, and were generally available in business activities where the claimant would have been considered as employable therefor."
This determination must be reconsidered, we think, for it rests first upon an incomplete and then upon a mistaken assessment of the evidence regarding the onset of the psychoneurosis. To start with, the Examiner noted that "the record...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Slaughter v. Colvin
...pre-date last insured disability comes from retrospective consideration of subsequent medical records. Id. (citing Moore v. Finch, 418 F.2d 1224, 1226 (4th Cir. 1969)). The Bird decision further provides that the subsequent medical evidence need not include a retrospective diagnosis so long......
-
Kemp v. Astrue, Civil Action No. 8:09-3318-JDA
...deteriorating lung condition that may have reached a disabling degree by the time the claimant's insured status expired); Moore v. Finch, 418 F.2d 1224 (4th Cir. 1969) (finding it was error for the adjudicator not to consider reports of medical evaluations subsequent to the expiration of th......
-
Joe v. Colvin
...of a claimant's pre-DLI disability comes from retrospective consideration of subsequent medical records. Id. (citing Moore v. Finch, 418 F.2d 1224, 1226 (4th Cir. 1969)). Bird further provides that the subsequent medical evidence need not include a retrospective diagnosis so long as the tre......
-
Roberts v. Colvin, Civil Action No. 8:15-cv-00076-TMC-JDA
...of a claimant's pre-DLI disability comes from retrospective consideration of subsequent medical records. Id. (citing Moore v. Finch, 418 F.2d 1224, 1226 (4th Cir. 1969)). Accordingly, "retrospective consideration of evidence is appropriate when 'the record is not so persuasive as to rule ou......
-
Table of Cases
...-14 Moore v. Commissioner, 278 F.3d 920 (9th Cir. Jan. 24, 2002), 9th-02, §§ 101.6, 203.7, 204.4, 204.7, 205.10, 607.2 Moore v. Finch , 418 F.2d 1224, 1226 (4th Cir. 1969), 4th-12 Moore v. Halter , 168 F. Supp.2d 1137, 1141 (N.D. Cal. 2001), § 308.1 Moore v. Shalala , Civ. No. 94-26-FR, 199......
-
Table of cases
...Moore v. Commissioner, 278 F.3d 920 (9th Cir. Jan. 24, 2002), 9th-02, §§ 101.6, 203.7, 204.4, 204.7, 205.10, 607.2 Moore v. Finch , 418 F.2d 1224, 1226 (4th Cir. 1969), 4th-12 Moore v. Halter , 168 F. Supp.2d 1137, 1141 (N.D. Cal. 2001), § 308.1 Moore v. Shalala , Civ. No. 94-26-FR, 1994 WL......