Legal Opinion
Nanny v. Mathews
District Court, E.D. Virginia
Decided December 7, 1976No. Civ. A. 76-0182PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
MERHIGE, District Judge.
Mary B. Nanny brings this action under Section 205(g) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), to review a final decision of the Secretary in which it was held that plaintiff was not entitled to disability benefits upon an application filed May 16, 1975. The sole issue before the Court is whether the final decision of the Secretary is based upon substantial evidence. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). The defendant has moved for summary judgment, and the plaintiff has cross-moved for summary judgment. The matter is ripe for disposition.
The function of the Court…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Clistie Bell Thomas v. Anthony J. Celebrezze, Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1964
- William B. Vitek v. Robert H. Finch, Secretary of Health, Education, and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1971
- Rena Sklar Oppenheim v. Robert H. Finch, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare (Now Caspar Weinberger,)Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1974
- Doris A. Taylor v. Caspar Weinberger, Secretary of Health, Education and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1975
- Lucille F. Thorne v. Caspar W. Weinberger, as Secretary of Health, Education and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1976
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- George Dobrowolsky v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary, Health, Education, and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1979
- Stewart v. HarrisDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1980
- Duncan v. HarrisDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1980
- Maggio v. HecklerDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1984
- Fulcher v. AstrueDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2008
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.