Mack Hall, Sr. v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare

Mack Hall brought this action in the district court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g), to review a final decision of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare denying his application for Social Security disability benefits. Hall appeals from an order granting summary judgment in favor of the Secretary.

Because we conclude that the Secretary’s findings are not adequate, we remand to the district court with instructions to direct the Secretary to make appropriate findings in accordance with this opinion.

Mack Hall worked as a counselor at a boys’ home until June, 1974, when he quit because of physical ailments, including hemorrhoids, back problems, hypertension, and chest and leg pains. He was 50 years old and had two years of college training.

Hall filed for disability benefits in October 1974 without the assistance of a lawyer. His application was denied initially and on reconsideration by the Bureau of Disability Insurance. Hall requested a hearing before an administrative law judge but waived his right to appear personally.

The administrative law judge, considering the case de novo, found that appellant was not disabled on or before December 31, 1975, the date on which he…

concurring in part and dissenting in part:

I concur in the decision to reverse the determination that administrative notice of a claimant’s ability to do light or sedentary work does not satisfy the Secretary’s burden of proof. It must be shown that a claimant can do a specific job which involves “substantial gainful work [and] which exists in the national economy.” 42 U.S.C. § 423 (d)(2)(A).

The opinion recognizes that there is no evidence that Hall is able to do any other job. Nevertheless, the case is remanded to the Secretary for additional findings or for the agency to present additional evidence on Hall’s ability to do other work. Apparently Hall may be denied the privilege of introducing evidence, including evidence of a psychological disability, with the assistance of counsel.

I believe we should reverse and direct the entry of a judgment for Hall. But if we remand for further evidence we should permit Hall the opportunity, with the assistance of counsel, to introduce all relevant rebuttal evidence. See Boyer v. Califano, 598 F.2d 1117, 1119-20 (8th Cir. 1979).

I believe parts II and III of the opinion are dicta and unnecessary.

602 F.2d 1372 Mack HALL, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFARE, Defendant-Appellee. No. 77-2492. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Aug. 27, 1979. Eva Halbreich, Asst. U. S. Atty., Los Angeles, Cal., for defendant-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Before CARTER and WRIGHT, Circuit Judges, and SOLOMON, * District Judge. EUGENE A. WRIGHT, Circuit Judge: 1 Mack Hall brought this action in the district court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g), to review a final decision of the Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare denying his application for Social Security disability benefits. Hall appeals from an order granting summary judgment in favor of the Secretary. 2 Because we conclude that the Secretary's findings are not adequate, we remand to the district court with instructions to direct the Secretary to make appropriate findings in accordance with this opinion. 3 Mack Hall worked as a counselor at a boys' home until June, 1974, when he quit because of physical ailments, including hemorrhoids, back problems, hypertension, and chest and leg pains. He was 50 years old and had…