Legal Opinion
Knight v. Celebrezze
District Court, W.D. South Carolina
Decided March 11, 1965No. Civ. A. Nos. 4424, 4107PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HEMPHILL, District Judge.
Defendant, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, has moved to dismiss these two actions 1 on the basis that the appeals to this Court from an adverse decision of the Secretary were not made within the sixty days provided for in the applicable statute.
*898There is no dispute as to the time involved. Plaintiff Paul Mahaffey’s complaint was filed one day beyond the sixty day period provided for, and plaintiff Marie B. Knight’s complaint was filed three days beyond the sixty day period provided by the statute.
The only question is whether or not this Court has authority…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- United States v. SherwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
- United States v. BabcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- National Labor Relations Board v. Cheney California Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Oveta Culp Hobby, Secretary of Department of Health, Education and Welfare v. Joseph HodgesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1954
- Pennsylvania Co. for Insurances on Lives & Granting Annuities v. DeckertCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Johnson v. MathewsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1976
- Satterfield v. CelebrezzeDistrict Court, W.D. South Carolina · 1965
- Saxon v. CelebrezzeDistrict Court, W.D. South Carolina · 1965
- Estep v. WeinbergerDistrict Court, S.D. West Virginia · 1976
- Henderson v. CelebrezzeDistrict Court, W.D. South Carolina · 1965
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.