Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Eldridge v. Weinberger

493 F.2d 1230

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1974-04-01
Topic
general

PER CURIAM: Before BRYAN, Senior Circuit Judge, and BUTZNER, Circuit Judge. Asserting that his action in terminating appellee George H. Eldridge’s medical disability payments, in July 1972, without a prior oral evidentiary hearing, was proper under the Social Security Administration’s regulations, the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare now appeals the District Court’s injunction of the termination.1 The point in this case is whether the procedure prescribed in the regulations2 —textually followed by the Secretary— afforded the recipient Constitutional due process in allowing his disability payments to be terminated without such an ore tenus hearing as is projected in Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254, 264, 267, 90 S.Ct. 1011, 25 L.Ed.2d 287 (1970). On the District Judge’s opinion, we affirm.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Eldridge v. Weinberger. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
5 opinions
ELDRIDGE v. WEINBERGER,493 F.2d 1230(4th Cir. 1974)
GEORGE H. ELDRIDGE, APPELLEE v. CASPAR WEINBERGER, SECRETARY OF HEALTH,
EDUCATION AND WELFARE, APPELLANT.
No. 73-1864.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Argued February 7, 1974.
Decided April 1, 1974.
James C. Hair, Jr., Atty., U.S. Dept. of Justice, (Irvin Jaffe, Acting Asst.Page 1231Atty. Gen., Leigh B. Hanes, Jr., U.S. Atty., and Kathryn H. Baldwin, Atty., U.S. Dept. of Justice, on brief), for appellant.

Donald E. Earls and Carl E. McAfee, Norton, Va. (Cline, McAfee, Adkins Gillenwater, Norton, Va., on brief), for appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Abingdon; James C. Turk, Chief Judge.
PER CURIAM:
Before BRYAN, Senior Circuit Judge, and BUTZNER, Circuit Judge.
[1] Asserting that his action in terminating appellee George H. Eldridge's medical disability payments, in July 1972, without a priororalevidentiary hearing, was proper under the Social Security Administration's regulations, the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare now appeals the District Court's injunction of the termination.1

[2] The point in this case is whether the procedure prescribed in the regulations2— textually followed by the Secretary — afforded the recipient Constitutional due process in allowing his disability payments to be terminated without such an ore tenus hearing as is projected in Goldberg v. Kelly,397 U.S. 254,264,267,90 S.Ct. 1011,25 L.Ed.2d 287(1970). On the District Judge's opinion, we affirm. Eldridge v. Weinberger,361 F. Supp. 520(W.D.Va. 1973).

[3] Affirmed.Page 1329
  1. 42 U.S.C. § 405(a);20 C.F.R. § 404.1et seq. ↩
  2. Disability Insurance State Manual, as revised February 25, 1972; and Claims Manual of the Social Security Administration. ↩