Lucretia M. ADAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Otis R. BOWEN, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-Appellee

Good Law
872 F.2d 926·1989 WL 36534·1989 U.S. App. LEXIS 5182
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 19, 198988-3743California1,477 words

Opinion

Opinion

Canby, J.

Lucretia Adams appeals from the district court’s decision upholding the determination of the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secretary) that Adams is not entitled to social security disability benefits, 683 F.Supp. 231 . The Secretary’s decision to deny benefits “ ‘will be disturbed only if it is not supported by substantial evidence or it is based on legal error.’ ” Brawner v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 839 F.2d 432, 433 (9th Cir.1988) (quoting Green v. Heckler, 803 F.2d 528, 529 (9th Cir.1986)). See 42 U.S.C. § 405 (g) (1982). We review the district court’s conclusion de novo. Gamer v. Secretary of Health & Human Servs., 815 F.2d 1275, 1278 (9th Cir.1987).

BACKGROUND

The relevant facts are undisputed. Adams, a 56-year-old diabetic with impaired vision, has 32 quarters of coverage since 1980 and is “fully” insured under the requirements of 20 C.F.R. § 404.130 (1988). However, Adams does not have 20 quarters of coverage in the 40-quarter period ending with the quarter of alleged disability; therefore, she is not “specially” insured. Because Adams is “fully,” but not “specially,” insured, she must be statutorily blind in order to be eligible for disability…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.