Evans

Evans v. Chater

Good Law
110 F.3d 1480·97 Daily Journal DAR 4805·1997 WL 174850·1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 6767·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2694
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 14, 1997No. 95-36178California2,319 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Tashima, J.

This is an appeal from an order of the district court holding that it lacked jurisdiction to review the refusal of appellee Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (Commissioner) to reopen appellant Evans’ two prior Supplemental Security Income (SSI) applications. Although we conclude that the district court erred when it held that it lacked jurisdiction, we nonetheless affirm because Evans’ constitutional rights were not violated.

I

Evans applied for SSI benefits three times; the first two applications were denied. His third application was granted by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) on May 5, 1994. The ALJ, however, denied his request to reopen his first two applications. Evans filed his first SSI application on March 6, 1990. The Commissioner denied the claim on July 17, 1990. Evans did not request reconsideration. He filed his second SSI application on June 7,1991, and it was denied on December 23,1991. Again, Evans did not request reconsideration.

Evans filed his third SSI application on March 31, 1993. The application was denied on July 29, 1993. Up to this point, Evans had been acting pro se. On August 26,1993, with the help of the Lane County Legal Aid…

Concurring Opinion

Schwarzer, J.

concurring:

I concur. As I understand the court’s decision, it holds that on the facts alleged, the claimant stated a colorable due process claim. I do not understand it to hold that lack of counsel is a necessary element of such a claim.

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.