Peoples v. Richardson
| Citation | 455 F.2d 924 |
| Decision Date | 10 February 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 15389.,15389. |
| Parties | Roy H. PEOPLES, Appellee, v. Elliott L. RICHARDSON, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Appellant. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit) |
Raymond D. Battocchi, Atty., Dept. of Justice (L. Patrick Gray, III, Asst. Atty. Gen. of U. S., Kathryn H. Baldwin, Atty., Dept. of Justice, Joseph O. Rogers, Jr., and John K. Grisso, U. S. Attys., D. S. C., on brief), for appellant.
James B. Stephen, Spartanburg, S. C. (George H. Thomason, Spartanburg, S. C., on brief), for appellee.
Before BOREMAN, Senior Circuit Judge, and BRYAN and BUTZNER, Circuit Judges.
The Secretary appeals from the district court's order remanding Roy H. Peoples' third application for a period of disability and disability benefits under the Social Security Act for an evidentiary hearing on its merits. We reverse and remand for dismissal of Peoples' complaint.
Peoples filed his first application on November 1, 1962, claiming disability as of July 2, 1962 because of high blood pressure and a heart condition. After a hearing, the examiner denied the application, and the appeals council affirmed. Peoples did not seek judicial review.
On November 3, 1966, Peoples filed his second application again claiming disability from July 1962. This application was denied initially and on reconsideration. Peoples did not seek a hearing.
Peoples' third application, filed May 6, 1969, was denied initially and on reconsideration. His request for a hearing was dismissed on the ground of res judicata because the examiner concluded that the decision on the second application, which had become final, adjudicated all his rights through the expiration of his insured status on September 30, 1966. The appeals council affirmed. The district judge, however, held that res judicata was inapplicable because Peoples had no hearing on his second application.
After the decision of the district court in this case, we ruled in Leviner v. Richardson, 443 F.2d 1338 (4th Cir. 1971), that proceedings on which the doctrine of res judicata is based need not include a hearing. In Leviner, because the record on appeal was incomplete, we remanded so the district court could determine whether res judicata was applicable. In contrast, the record now before us is adequate to show that Peoples' third application was properly dismissed by the hearing examiner under the doctrine of res judicata. The rights, issues, and facts involved in both the second and third applications were the same, and no error appears on the face of the record. Easley v. Finch, 431 F.2d 1351 (4th Cir. 1970).
Parenthetically, we note that the Secretary asks us to treat the third application as a petition to reopen the second application and to consider the denial of the ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cole v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare
...of the hearing request on the subsequent application and for preclusion of judicial review of the dismissal action. Peoples v. Richardson, 455 F.2d 924 (4th Cir. 1971); Rushing v. Finch, supra; Fox v. Richardson, 320 F.Supp. 870 (W. D.Va.1970); Salyers v. Celebrezze, 214 F.Supp. 834 (W.D.Va......
-
Lewis v. SECRETARY, DEPT. OF HEW, 77 Civ. 1746 (JMC).
...3 See note 2 supra. 4 In support of his assertion that this rule is not unanimously followed, plaintiff cites Peoples v. Richardson, 455 F.2d 924 (4th Cir. 1972) and Stewart v. Califano, 462 F.Supp. 158 (D.Kan. 1978). Peoples, however, predates Califano v. Sanders, supra, by five years and ......
-
Cleaton v. Secretary, Dept. of Health and Human Services
...v. Califano, 560 F.2d 615 (4th Cir.1977), overruled on other grounds, Hyatt v. Heckler, 807 F.2d 376 (4th Cir.1986); Peoples v. Richardson, 455 F.2d 924 (4th Cir.1972); Gross v. Schweiker, 577 F.Supp. 887, 889 (M.D.Ga.1984). Cleaton finally argues that administrative res judicata does not b......
-
Capuano v. Fairfax Cnty. Pub. Bd.
...Circuit has taken a similar approach for claim preclusion with respect to social security disability appeals. See Peoples v. Richardson, 455 F.2d 924, 925 (4th Cir. 1972) (res judicata applies where "rights, issues, and facts" involves in successive disability benefits application were the ......