Rennar v. Weinberger, 74-407-C.
| Decision Date | 15 September 1975 |
| Docket Number | No. 74-407-C.,74-407-C. |
| Citation | 399 F. Supp. 1301 |
| Parties | Mary G. RENNAR, Plaintiff, v. Caspar W. WEINBERGER, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare of the United States of America, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Oklahoma |
A. Camp Bonds, Muskogee, Okl., for plaintiff.
Betty Outhier Williams, Asst. U.S. Atty., Muskogee, Okl., for defendant.
In this action Plaintiff seeks judicial review of Defendant's administrative decision that she is not entitled to Widow's Benefits under Title IV of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969, as amended 30 U.S.C. § 901 et seq. Plaintiff is the widow of a coal miner who died in 1935. She filed her initial application for benefits under Part B of Title IV on May 12, 1971 (Tr. 28-31). Her application was denied initially on June 14, 1971. (Tr. 32-33). The Act was amended in 1972. Plaintiff's application was reviewed under the amended standards and again denied. (Tr. 34-36). Plaintiff then requested a hearing but waived her right to appear in person. The Administrative Law Judge considered the case do novo and concluded that Plaintiff was not entitled to benefits (Tr. 21-25). Plaintiff then, after the introduction of additional evidence, sought review of the Administrative Law Judge's decision before the Appeals Council. The Appeals Council considered the prior decision and also the additional evidence and concluded that the decision of the Administrative Law Judge was correct (Tr. 3). Plaintiff then filed this action under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
The purpose of Title IV is, in part, to provide benefits to the surviving dependents of coal miners who were totally disabled due to pneumoconiosis at the time of their deaths. 30 U.S.C. § 901. The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare is charged with the responsibility of administering the Act with respect to claims filed by widows of miners dying on or before December 31, 1973. 30 U.S.C. § 924. The Secretary is charged with the responsibility of promulgating regulations for determining whether a miner was totally disabled due to pneumoconiosis at the time of his death. 30 U.S.C. § 921. There are certain statutory presumptions relating to the determination of pneumoconiosis established by the Act. 30 U.S.C. § 921. These presumptions are repeated in the Secretary's regulations. 20 C.F.R. § 410.401 et seq.
Judicial review of administrative decisions relating to applications made under Title IV is conducted pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). 30 U.S.C. § 923. Under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) the Secretary's decision must be affirmed if supported by substantial evidence. Substantial evidence is defined as such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 91 S.Ct. 1420, 28 L.Ed.2d 842 (1971).
In conducting this review this Court is required to examine the facts contained in the administrative record, evaluate the conflicts, and make a determination whether the facts support the several elements which make up the ultimate administrative decision. Nickol v. United States, 501 F.2d 1389 (Tenth Cir. 1974); Heber Valley Milk Company v. Butz, 503 F.2d 96 (Tenth Cir. 1974). The burden is on the Plaintiff to establish entitlement to benefits under the Act. 20 C.F.R. § 410.410. See also Kutchman v. Cohen, 425 F.2d 20 (Seventh Cir. 1970). Judicial review is limited to an inquiry as to whether there is substantial evidence contained in the record as a whole to support the final decision of the Secretary. Hedge v. Richardson, 458 F.2d 1065 (Tenth Cir. 1972).
The ultimate administrative decision herein is evidenced by the "Findings" of the Administrative Law Judge as that decision was adopted by the Appeals Council in its final action. (Tr. 3). The essence of the Administrative Law Judge's "Findings" is that Plaintiff's Deceased was not totally disabled due to pneumoconiosis at the time of his death, (Tr. 24 "Finding" No. 3), and that the evidence fails to establish that at the time of his death the disability of Plaintiff's deceased was of sufficient severity, because of pneumoconiosis, to preclude him from doing his previous coal mine work, or considering his age, education, and work experience, to engage in other kinds of comparable gainful work available to him in the immediate area of his residence. (Tr. 24-25, "Finding" No. 6).
The following relevant evidence is contained in the record: A copy of Plaintiff's Deceased's death certificate,1 showing that the Deceased died on July 8, 1935 as the result of a gunshot wound. A copy of Plaintiff's application for benefits. In this Application Plaintiff states that her Deceased was able to work prior to his death; that the Deceased died as a result of a gunshot wound during a fight; that the only doctor to treat the Deceased was a Dr. Nelson whom he visited about a sore on the mouth; and that the Deceased was never in a hospital. (Tr. 29-31). An affidavit made by Leonard Hodge stated that he knew Plaintiff's Deceased; that the Deceased had respiratory disease; that the Deceased told him that the disease was caused by working in the mines; that the summer before he died the Deceased was unable to work at all; and that for some time prior to that the Deceased had only been able to work a limited time. (Tr. 12-13). An affidavit made by Johnson Hodge stating that he knew the Deceased in the years before his death; that he was never in good health; that he was short of breath; and that the summer before his death the Deceased became extremely ill with respiratory disease. (Tr. 5-6). An affidavit made by Benney Harvey stating that he knew the Deceased during the last years of his life; that the Deceased was unable to work; and that he would on occasion drive the Deceased to town to see a doctor (Tr. 10). And an affidavit made by the Plaintiff in which she states that during the last years of his life the Deceased had lung disease caused by working in the mines; that the Deceased was unable to work because of the disease; and that the Deceased had worked in the mines all of his life. (Tr. 7-8).
There are several methods prescribed in the Secretary's regulations whereby the Plaintiff can establish her claim. As it is undisputed that Plaintiff's Deceased died as the result of a gunshot wound, and not pneumoconiosis, the only question is whether the Secretary's decision that the Plaintiff has failed to establish that her Deceased was totally disabled by pneumoconiosis, or a disease presumed to be pneumoconiosis, at the time of his death is supported by substantial evidence.
First, it is clear that Plaintiff...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Dobbins v. Schweiker, 78-3100
...Law Judge is not required to believe the testimony of interested witnesses, even if not contradicted, Rennar v. Weinberger, 399 F.Supp. 1301, 1304 (E.D.Okl.1975), but he has a correlative duty to make a specific finding of fact to that effect, Baerga v. Richardson, 500 F.2d 309 (3d Cir. 197......
-
Lloyd v. Mathews, Civ. A. No. 74-3331.
...Law Judge is not required to believe the testimony of interested witnesses, even if not contradicted, Rennar v. Weinberger, 399 F.Supp. 1301, 1304 (E.D.Okl. 1975), but he has a correlative duty to make a specific finding of fact to that effect, Baerga v. Richardson, 500 F.2d 309 (3d Cir. 19......
-
Romanot v. Mathews, Civ. A. No. 75-2619.
...Law Judge is not required to believe the testimony of an interested witness, even if not contradicted. Rennar v. Weinberger, 399 F.Supp. 1301, 1304 (E.D.Okl.1975). Even if Mr. Romanot's death was caused by multiple factors, i. e. by both pneumoconiosis and cerebral thrombosis, those disease......