Mary M. Camp (87-3275/3279), Alfred E. Combs, (87-3275/3279), Joseph Benton, (87-4015) v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 849 F.2d 608 (6th Cir. 1988). · Go Syfert
Search
Mary M. Camp (87-3275/3279), Alfred E. Combs, (87-3275/3279), Joseph Benton, (87-4015) v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 849 F.2d 608 (6th Cir. 1988). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
33 citation events (4 in the last 25 years) across 12 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Delahanty v. Hinckley (dc, 1989-10-11)
Treatment trajectory · 1988 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1988 2007 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Delahanty v. Hinckley
D.C. · 1989 · signal: see · confidence high
See Caveny v. Raven Arms Co., 665 F.Supp. 530, 532-33 (S.D.Ohio 1987), aff'd, 849 F.2d 608 (6th Cir.1988); Armijo v. Ex Cam, Inc., 656 F.Supp. 771, 773 (D.N.M.1987), aff 'd, 843 F.2d 406 (10th Cir.1988); Coulson v. DeAngelo, 493 So.2d 98, 99 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1986); Riordan v. International Armament Corp., 132 Ill.App.3d 642, 649-51 , 87 Ill.Dec. 765, 769-70 , 477 N.E.2d 1293, 1298-99 (1985); Kelley, 497 A.2d at 1147-50 ; Richardson v. Holland, 741 S.W.2d 751, 753-54 (Mo.Ct.App.1987).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Denholm v. Smyrna Ready Mix Concrete, LLC
E.D. Ky. · 2021 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Armstrong Rubber Co. v. NLRB, 849 F.2d 608 (6th Cir. 1988).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Curro v. Watson (2×)
E.D.N.Y · 1995 · signal: see also · confidence low
See generally Daniels v. Williams, 474 U.S. 327 , 106 S.Ct. 662 , 88 L.Ed.2d 662 (1986) (Section 1983 does not apply to acts that are merely negligent.); see also Carson v. Veasy, 849 F.2d 608 , No. 88-1129, 1988 WL 60725, at *1 (6th Cir. June 14, 1988) (Dismissing complaint alleging that the defendant court reporter intentionally falsified and altered a transcript, holding that summary judgment was proper because the plaintiff had not alleged or shown the inadequacy of state remedies.) (citing Hudson, 468 U.S. at 533 ; Parratt, 451 U.S. at 543 ).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mary M. Camp (87-3275/3279), Alfred E. Combs, (87-3275/3279), Joseph Benton, (87-4015)
v.
Secretary of Health and Human Services
87-3275.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
Jun 10, 1988.
849 F.2d 608
Unpublished

849 F.2d 608

Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Sixth Circuit Rule 24(c) states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Sixth Circuit.
Mary M. CAMP (87-3275/3279), Plaintiff-Appellee,
Alfred E. Combs, (87-3275/3279), Plaintiff-Appellee,
Joseph Benton, (87-4015), Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Defendant-Appellant.

Nos. 87-3275, 87-3279 and 87-4015.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

June 10, 1988.

BEFORE BOYCE F. MARTIN, Jr., MILBURN and RALPH B. GUY, Jr., Circuit Judges.

ORDER

1

These cases have been referred to a panel of this court pursuant to Rule 9(a), Rules of the Sixth Circuit. Upon examination of the briefs and the records, this panel unanimously agrees that oral argument is not needed. Fed.R.App.P. 34(a).

2

These cases are appeals by the Secretary from three separate decisions of the district court finding the individual plaintiffs to be disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act. The sole issue on appeal is whether or not the district court employed a correct analysis in rejecting the Secretary's contention that the plaintiffs were not disabled because substantial gainful work existed in significant numbers which they could perform. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 423(d)(2)(A). The Secretary, citing the intervening decision in Hall v. Bowen, 837 F.2d 272 (6th Cir.1988), contends the district court's analysis was clearly incorrect and moves for summary reversal of all three decisions.

3

In Hall this court disapproved of a "significant numbers" analysis similar to the ones employed in the instant cases. We noted that "when there is testimony that a significant number of jobs exists for which a claimant is qualified, it is immaterial that this number is a small percentage of the total number of jobs in a given area." 837 F.2d at 275. Our review of these cases, however, does not end with this holding. The Hall court further enumerated several factors which trial courts should consider in deciding a "significant numbers" question. As the instant cases were decided prior to our decision in Hall, we must vacate and remand for the trial court's application of the analysis detailed there. Id.

4

Accordingly, the motions for summary reversal are denied as not being authorized under the rules of the court. However, the judgments of the district court are vacated and the cases remanded for further proceedings. Rule 9(b)(6), Rules of the Sixth Circuit.