Tolbert v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH, ETC., 81 C 1732.
Decision Date | 07 April 1982 |
Docket Number | No. 81 C 1732.,81 C 1732. |
Parties | Joseph TOLBERT, Plaintiff, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois |
Joseph Tolbert, pro se.
Eileen Marutzky, Asst. U. S. Atty., Chicago, Ill., for defendant.
Joseph Tolbert ("Tolbert") seeks review of a decision by the Secretary of Health and Human Services ("Secretary") denying Tolbert disability benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act (the "Act"), 42 U.S.C. § 423. Secretary has moved under Fed.R.Civ.P. ("Rule") 12(b)(1) to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. For the reasons stated in this memorandum opinion and order, Secretary's motion is granted.1
Tolbert has filed five applications for disability benefits, all of which have been denied:
Tolbert now invokes 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) to review the denial of his fifth application.2 This is the first time Tolbert has sought judicial review of an administrative denial of his application for disability benefits.
Under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) and (h) this Court can review only final decisions by the Secretary. When the Secretary has once denied an application for disability benefits and a second like application is presented, he has the following options:3
ALJs held that Tolbert's last two applications presented the identical claim that had been made in his earlier applications and were thus barred by administrative res judicata. Though Tolbert submitted new evidence on each occasion, the ALJs examined the evidence and found nothing that merited reopening the case. Secretary claims those rulings are not final decisions subject to federal court review.
Secretary's determination that a claim is barred by res judicata and his companion decision not to reopen a case are indeed not final decisions open to district court review. Davis v. Schweiker, 665 F.2d 934, 935 (9th Cir. 1982); Rios v. Secretary of HEW, 614 F.2d 25, 26 (1st Cir. 1980); Hensley v. Califano, 601 F.2d 216 (5th Cir. 1979); Carney v. Califano, 598 F.2d 472, 474 (8th Cir. 1979). But that proposition does not necessarily end the inquiry.
Secretary would have this Court dismiss any proceeding in which he had dismissed an application on res judicata grounds.4 This Court finds more persuasive the thoughtful approach of the Fourth Circuit in McGowen v. Harris, 666 F.2d 60 (4th Cir. 1981). Because a court always has "jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction" (id. at 64), this Court would abdicate that responsibility by responding in a purely Pavlovian way to the Secretary's statement that res judicata applied. For that reason McGowen specified two instances in which a district court can review Secretary's refusal (a) to grant a hearing on the basis of res judicata and (b) to exercise discretion to reopen the proceeding:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Burnett v. Heckler, 85-3023.
...decision and her determination to apply the doctrine of res judicata to that decision as "companion decisions". See Tolbert v. Secretary, 537 F.Supp. 631, 632 (N.D.Ill. 1982). Such a determination also comports with the Secretary's regulations which state that a decision to apply res judica......
-
Hennings v. Heckler
...reopened the original claim. See McGowen v. Harris, 666 F.2d 60, 65-66 (4th Cir.1981); Tolbert v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 537 F.Supp. 631, 632-633 (N.D.Ill.1982). If we find that the original claim and the subsequent claim are not the "same" claims for purposes of applying t......
-
Joseph Ciccone & Sons, Inc. v. EASTERN INDUSTRIES
... ... Civ. A. No. 81-3203 ... United States District Court, E. D ... ...
-
Krizan v. Apfel
...neither of these events constituted a "final decision" as contemplated by 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). See Tolbert v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 537 F.Supp. 631, 632 (N.D.Ill.1982) ("Secretary's determination that a claim is barred by res judicata and his companion decision not to reope......