Charles Veal v. Joseph A. Califano, Jr., Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare of the United States (1979)
green
· 15 citation events
across 9 courts.
Showing the 10 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Heckler v. Campbell (1983)
See, e. g., Currier v. Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, 612 F. 2d 594, 598 (CA1 1980); Veal v. Califano, 610 F. 2d 495, 497-498 (CA8 1979); Cox v. Califano, 587 F. 2d 988, 990-991 (CA9 1978); Copley v. Richardson, 475 F. 2d 772, 773-774 (CA6 1973).
green
Garnet Morse v. Donna E. Shalala, 1 Secretary of Health and Human Services of the United States (1994)
See Thompson v. Sullivan, 957 F.2d 611, 614 (8th Cir.1992); Henderson v. Sullivan, 930 F.2d 19, 21 (8th Cir.1991); Hancock v. Secretary of the Dep’t of Health, Educ. and Welfare, 603 F.2d 739, 740 (8th Cir.1979) (“[T]he report of a consulting physician who examined the claimant once does not constitute ‘substantial evi dence’ upon the record as a whole, especially when contradicted by the evaluation of the claimant’s treating physician.” (citations omitted)); Veal v. Califan…
No. 103-296 and Fed.R.App.P. 43(c)(1) *** The Honorable Edward Rafeedie, United States District Court Judge for the Central District of California, sitting by designation * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided for by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 1 Butts argues that the ALJ erred in relying on his testimony that he could perform his past work and cites to Veal v. Califano, 610 F.2d 495, 498 …
See also Ferguson v. Schweiker, 641 F.2d at 249 ; Lofton v. Schweiker, 653 F.2d 215, 218 (5th Cir.1981); Veal v. Califano, 610 F.2d 495, 497 (8th Cir.1979); Swaim v. Califano, 599 F.2d 1309, 1312 (4th Cir. 1979).
green
Dawn Driggins, by Her Guardian Ad Litem Virgil S. Driggins v. Patricia R. Harris, Secretary-Designate, Depart… (1981)
Veal v. Califano, 610 F.2d 495, 498 (8th Cir. 1979).
green
Richardson v. Heckler (1984)
Those statements are likely the rationalization of a sick individual and cannot constitute substantial evidence, see Veal v. Califano, 610 F.2d 495, 498 (8th Cir.1979); at other times during the hearing he stated that he was a pool shark and intended to some day make a lot of money playing pool (Tr. 22); that he was going to be a lawyer (Tr. 22); that he can play the guitar and sing like Elvis Presley (Tr. 34-35); and that there “[ajin’t nothing I can’t do.” (Tr. 35).
Veal v. Califano, 610 F. 2d 495, 497 (8th Cir. 1979); Allen v. Weinberger, supra, at 786; Landess v. Weinberger, supra, at 1190.
See, e. g., Veal v. Califano, 610 F.2d 495, 497-98 (8th Cir. 1979); Allen v. Weinberger, 552 F.2d 781, 786 (7th Cir. 1977); Martin v. Secretary of HEW, 492 F.2d 905, 907-908 (4th Cir. 1974). 9 .
green
Brennan v. Schweiker (1982)
See also, Veal v. Califano, 610 F.2d 495, 497 (8th Cir. 1979) and Griffis v. Weinberger, 509 F.2d 837, 838 (9th Cir. 1975).
green
Martin v. Schweiker (1982)
Other case law has established the separate principle that the critical issue in evaluating a claim for benefits based upon alcoholism is whether the claimant “has through his addiction to alcohol so far lost self control that he is impotent to seek and use means of rehabilitation...” Adams v. Weinberger, 548 F.2d 239, 245 (8th Cir.1977), quoting with approval Badichek v. Secretary of HEW, 374 F.Supp. 940, 942-943 (E.D.N.Y.1974); see also Veal v. Califano, 610 F.2d 495 (8th …