applying res judicata to bar hearings on subsequent applications for disability benefits before the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare
How later courts described this case
- applying res judicata to bar hearings on subsequent applications for disability benefits before the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare
- discussing policies underlying application of res judicata in disability benefits cases
- “It would be wrong for the courts to intrude simply because the Secretary, exercising his discretion, chose not to relieve [the claimant] of the latter’s neglect.”
- Merrill, Browning, Duniway, Hufstedler, and Wallace, JJ., concurring
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
MERRILL, Circuit Judge
(with whom BROWNING, DUNIWAY, HUFSTED-LER and WALLACE, JJ., concur) concurring :
I concur in the result. The reasons advanced by Judge Ely for according respect to earlier administrative determinations on the basis of administrative res judicata provide ample grounds for affirming on the merits the decision of the Secretary to deny reopening.
However, I agree with the Second Circuit, for th.e reasons set forth in Cappadora v. Celebrezze, 356 F.2d 1 (2d Cir. 1966), that a limited area of judicial review has been afforded by the Administrative Procedure Act, and that the second sentence of 42 U.S.C. § 405 (h) should not be construed to preclude judicial review; that that sentence “simply forbids attempts to review final decisions on the merits by any route other than that provided in § 405(g).” 356 F.2d at 5 . (Emphasis supplied.) Proceeding to limited review of the Secretary’s decision here, I would affirm that decision on the merits.