Legal Opinion

Snelling v. Ribicoff

District Court, E.D. South Carolina

Decided October 13, 1961No. AC/439PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CHARLES CECIL WYCHE, District Judge (sitting by designation).

This action is brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C.A. § 405(g) to review a decision by the defendant which held that plaintiff is not entitled to the benefits of the disability freeze provision of the Social Security Act. That provision, 42 U.S.C.A. § 416(i) (1), defines “disability” as an “inability to engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment which can be expected to result in death or to be of long-continued and indefinite duration,” and Section 416(i) (2) states…

2Cases cited45 opinions

  1. Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  3. Philip Kerner v. Arthur S. Flemming, Secretary of Health, Education and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1960
  4. Edward S. Butler v. Arthur S. Flemming, Secretary of Department of Health, Education and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1961
  5. Herbert L. Goldman, Administrator of the Estate of Esther B. Goldman v. Marion B. Folsom, Secretary of Health, Education and WelfareCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1957

40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Corbin v. RibicoffDistrict Court, W.D. South Carolina · 1962
  2. Foster v. RibicoffDistrict Court, W.D. South Carolina · 1962
  3. Richardson v. RibicoffDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 1962
  4. Braaksma v. CelebrezzeDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1965
  5. Crouch v. RibicoffDistrict Court, W.D. South Carolina · 1962

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API