Bernard G. Schmitz v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 141 F.3d 1185 (10th Cir. 1998). · Go Syfert
Search
Bernard G. Schmitz v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Comm'r of Soc. Sec., 141 F.3d 1185 (10th Cir. 1998). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
78 citation events (23 in the last 25 years) across 26 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Sacoman v. Santistevan (nmd, 2023-01-17)
Treatment trajectory · 1998 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1998 2012 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Sacoman v. Santistevan
D.N.M. · 2023 · signal: see · confidence high
See Sacoman v. Williams, 141 F.3d 1185 , 1998 WL 109845 (10th Cir. Sacoman appealed Judge Parker’s dismissal of the 1996 Petition to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
cited Cited "see" Sacoman v. Santistevan
D.N.M. · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
See Sacoman v. Williams, 141 F.3d 1185 , 1998 WL 109845 (10th Cir. March 12, 1998)(unpublished table decision).
cited Cited "see" Sacoman v. Santistevan
D.N.M. · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
See Sacoman v. Williams, 141 F.3d 1185 , 1998 WL 109845 (10th Cir. March 12, 1998)(unpublished table decision).
discussed Cited "see" Parker v. Town of Swansea
D. Mass. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Paul v. City of Altus, 141 F.3d 1185 , 1998 WL 94606, at * 2-3 (10th Cir.1998) (unpublished op.) (summary judgment denied where the evidence showed inappropriate training in method of arrest and multiple officers testified that the unlawful technique was consistent with their training).
cited Cited "see" Holler v. Cinemark USA, Inc.
D. Kan. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Sapp v. Greif, 961 F.Supp. 243, 248 (D.Kan.1997), aff'd, 141 F.3d 1185 , 1998 WL 165116 (10th Cir.1998).
discussed Cited "see" Rutlin v. Prime Succession, Inc.
W.D. Mich. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See Murphy v. United Parcel Service, 141 F.3d 1185 (10th Cir.1998), cert. granted, — U.S.-, 119 S.Ct. 790 , 142 L.Ed.2d 653 (1999); Sutton v. United Air Lines Inc., 130 F.3d 893 (10th Cir.1997), cert. granted, — U.S.-, 119 S.Ct. 790 , 142 L.Ed.2d 653 (1999).
discussed Cited "see" Katherine L. Taylor v. Phoenixville School District
3rd Cir. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See Murphy v. United Parcel Service, 141 F.3d 1185 (10th Cir.1998)(unpub-lished table decision), cert. granted, — U.S. -, 119 S.Ct. 790 , 142 L.Ed.2d 653 (1999); Kirkingburg v. Albertson’s Inc., 143 F.3d 1228 (9th Cir.1998), cert. granted, — U.S. -, 119 S.Ct. 791 , 142 L.Ed.2d 654 (1999).
discussed Cited "see" Taylor v. Phoenixville Sch Dst
3rd Cir. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See Murphy v. United Parcel Service, 141 F.3d 1185 (10th Cir. 1998)(unpublished table decision), cert. granted, 119 S.Ct. 790 (Jan. 8, 1999); Kirkingburg v. Albertson's Inc., 143 F.3d 1228 (9th Cir. 1998), cert. granted, 119 S.Ct. 791 (Jan. 8, 1999).
cited Cited "see" Ortiz v. Apfel
D. Kan. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See Sherman v. Apfel, 141 F.3d 1185 , No. 97-7085, 1998 WL 163355, at *3-4 (10th Cir. Apr.8, 1998) (Table, text on Westlaw).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Thoms v. ABF Freight System, Inc.
E.D. Wis. · 1998 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Murphy v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 946 F.Supp. 872 (D.Kan.1996), aff'd, 141 F.3d 1185 (10th Cir.1998) (table), in which the FMCSRs applied to a driver/mechanie of UPS tractor-trailers when packages on board were traveling in interstate commerce.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Bernard G. Schmitz
v.
Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security
97-3264.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.
Mar 30, 1998.
141 F.3d 1185
Published

141 F.3d 1185

98 CJ C.A.R. 1564

NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or further order.

Bernard G. SCHMITZ, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Kenneth S. APFEL, Commissioner of Social Security,
[*] Defendant-Appellee.

No. 97-3264.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

March 30, 1998.

Before BRORBY, BARRETT, and BRISCOE, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT[**]

JAMES E. BARRETT, Senior Circuit Judge.

1

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously to grant the parties' request for a decision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(f); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

2

Plaintiff appeals from the district court's affirmance of the Commissioner's denial of old age social security benefits. See Schmitz v. Callahan, 973 F.Supp. 1021 (D.Kan.1997). As in the district court, plaintiff argues that (1) his compensation for agricultural labor paid in the form of farm commodities is not earnings under the earnings test and therefore is not deductible from his social security benefits, and (2) the Commissioner improperly ignored his financial arrangements and applied the noncash compensation to reduce his benefits. We affirm.

3

We apply the same standards of review to the Commissioner's decision as the district court applied. The Commissioner's findings of fact are conclusive if they are supported by substantial evidence. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Substantial evidence is " 'such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.' " Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389, 401, 91 S.Ct. 1420, 28 L.Ed.2d 842 (1971) (quoting Consolidated Edison Co. v. NLRB, 305 U.S. 197, 229, 59 S.Ct. 206, 83 L.Ed. 126 (1938)). Such limited review does not apply to questions of law, however. See Byron v. Heckler, 742 F.2d 1232, 1235 (10th Cir.1984). "Failure to apply the correct legal standard ... is grounds for reversal." Id. (quotation omitted).

4

The district court thoroughly evaluated and properly rejected plaintiff's arguments under the proper standards of review. We AFFIRM for substantially the reasons stated by the district court in its opinion, see Schmitz, 973 F.Supp. 1021.

*

Pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(1), Kenneth S. Apfel is substituted for former Acting Commissioner John J. Callahan as the defendant-appellee in this appeal

**

This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3