Taylor v. Gardner, Civ. No. 552.
| Decision Date | 17 February 1967 |
| Docket Number | Civ. No. 552. |
| Parties | Opal L. TAYLOR and Mary A. Taylor, Plaintiffs, v. John W. GARDNER, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Arkansas |
Chas. R. Garner, Garner & Parker, Fort Smith, Ark., for plaintiff.
Ned A. Stewart, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Fort Smith, Ark., for defendant.
In this action the plaintiffs, Opal L. Taylor, and Mary A. Taylor, seek a review of the final decision of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, denying them benefits under the Social Security Act as the widow and daughter of Darwin P. Taylor, deceased. (42 U.S. C.A. § 402(d) and § 402(g))
Plaintiffs have exhausted administrative remedies and requesting the court to review adverse decision under 42 U.S. C.A. § 405(g).
Plaintiffs filed an application on May 20, 1964, for "Survivors Insurance Benefits" as the widow and mother of the child of Darwin P. Taylor, deceased wage earner. The claim was denied initially by the Kansas City Payment Center of the Social Security Administration on the basis that at the time of the decedent's death, July 28, 1949, he lacked the six "quarters of coverage" necessary to entitle his widow and afflicted child the benefits sought under Social Security Act.1
Plaintiffs sought and obtained a hearing before a Hearing Examiner of the office of the Bureau of Hearings and Appeals, Social Security Administration. The hearing was conducted by an Examiner on March 11, 1965, at Little Rock, Arkansas; both plaintiffs appeared in person without the assistance of counsel; voluminous documentary evidence, medical and other reports, including an opinion of this court, John E. Miller, Judge, dated June 12, 1953, (Taylor v. United States, D.C., 113 F.Supp. 143), in an ancillary proceeding, and the opinion of the United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, April 21, 1954, affirming the District Court, (Taylor v. Taylor et al., 211 F.2d 794), were made a part of the record; and both plaintiffs testified in support of their claim.
Upon the record and ore tenus testimony the Examiner filed a written opinion on March 23, 1965, denying the claim of the plaintiffs. In a timely request, plaintiffs sought and obtained a review of the Examiner's decision by the Administration's Appeal Council, which considered the decision of the Examiner, the record of the hearing and certain additional evidentiary material.
The Appeals Council on January 19, 1966, affirmed the decision of the Examiner, which became the final decision of the Secretary.
This timely suit followed. Jurisdiction is not questioned and is established. 42 U.S.C.A. § 405(g).
It is submitted to the court on a motion of the defendant for summary judgment. Each party has filed briefs on the motion as to their respective contentions.
The issue between the parties is whether or not the Secretary should have included the period of time the decedent spent in active service of the United States Navy between September 16, 1940, and July 24, 1947, in computing his quarters of coverage for the purpose of determining if his widow and child were entitled to benefits under the Social Security Act. 42 U.S.C.A. § 417.
If that period of active service had been included in the calculation of quarters of coverage, Decedent Taylor had substantially more than the required six quarters; and if such period of service is correctly excluded, the wage earner had less than the required six quarters. The Social Security Agency made a determination at all levels that the period of service should have been excluded.
The controlling facts in the case are not in dispute. The sole basis of the claim of the plaintiffs is that the decedent, Darwin P. Taylor, as husband and father, was mentally incompetent to make a determination for himself as to his choice of retirement at the time he was honorably retired from almost twenty years of Naval service, May 7, 1948.
Upon being relieved from active duty status, he was awarded retirement pay by the Navy. His entitlement to retirement pay, as well as the computation of the amount, was based on his entire record of service, including his active service in the United States Navy between September 16, 1940, and July 24, 1947.
The deceased wage earner served continuously in the Navy from the date of enlistment in 1928 until he was retired in 1948. He was an officer during his active duty service and at the time of his retirement. He and the plaintiff, Opal L. Taylor, were married in 1932. The plaintiff, Mary A. Taylor, was born to this marriage on June 22, 1935.
This service man, Taylor, was the holder of a $10,000 policy of National Service Life Insurance. In 1944, while the policy was in force, he attempted to change the beneficiary named in the policy from his wife, plaintiff herein, to his father, Crawford B. Taylor.
Before, during, and after 1944, the decedent Taylor's behavior as determined by the United States District Court, was "bizarre", which constituted evidence of mental disease. The Court made a finding "that on April 23, 1944, Darwin P. Taylor did not have sufficient mental capacity to comprehend the nature and consequence of his act in attempting to change the beneficiaries of his National Service Life Insurance policy." (Taylor v. United States, supra) It was further pointed out the decedent acquired delusions of various physical ailments; he also had an insane delusion of marital discord instituted during this period (1944) when deceased was under extraordinary stress, which persisted until his death. In the meantime, he had returned to active duty until his voluntary retirement, (1948).
In due time, following the death of the decedent in 1949, the Veterans' Administration awarded Survivor Benefits to the widow and daughter under Veterans' Benefit Acts as provided by Congress. The award of the Veterans' Administration became service-connected.
The basis of the decision of the Hearing Examiner which became the finding of the Agency and final decision of the Secretary in excluding the period of Taylor's World War II active service in his quarters of coverage for Social Security purposes, was the fact that such period of his active service was included by the Navy in computing his retirement benefits payable to him on separation from active duty in 1948.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Taylor v. Gardner
...is only reasonable they cannot after his death be considered as quarters of coverage for Social Security purposes." Taylor v. Gardner, 264 F.Supp. 610, 614 (W.D.Ark.1967). We cannot agree with the Secretary or the District Receipt of retirement benefits was not automatic. An application to ......
-
Atlantic Mutual Insurance Co. v. Clearview Club, Inc.
... ... D. New York ... February 17, 1967. Haight, Gardner, Poor & Havens, New York City, for plaintiff; J. M. Estabrook and Michael ... ...
-
Taylor v. Finch, 20029.
...with the facts and issues involved. He had affirmed the Secretary's determination that no coverage existed in an opinion reported at 264 F.Supp. 610, which we reversed in our opinion reported at 393 F.2d 257. Judge Harris' opinion and our opinion just referred to fairly set out the backgrou......
-
Taylor v. United States, H-73-C-9.
...of her deceased husband. Benefits were administratively denied and the denial affirmed by the District Court in an opinion reported at 264 F.Supp. 610. The Court of Appeals reversed the district court in an opinion reported at 393 F.2d 257 (1968) and directed award of Social Security In add......