20 C.F.R. § 404.1578
How we determine disability for widows, widowers, and surviving divorced spouses for monthly benefits payable for months prior to January 1991
(a) For monthly benefits payable for months prior to January 1991, we will find that you were disabled and pay you widow's or widower's benefits as a widow, widower, or surviving divorced spouse if—
(1) Your impairment(s) had specific clinical findings that were the same as those for any impairment in the Listing of Impairments in appendix 1 of this subpart or were medically equivalent to those for any impairment shown there;
(2) Your impairment(s) met the duration requirement.
(b) However, even if you met the requirements in paragraphs (a) (1) and (2) of this section, we will not find you disabled if you were doing substantial gainful activity.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 49
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1981–2026 · leading case: Sullivan v. Finkelstein, 496 U.S. 617 (1990).
Sullivan v. Finkelstein, 496 U.S. 617 (1990). “or are medically equivalent to" one of the listed impairments, 20 CFR § 404.1578 (a)(1) (1989). Cf. Heckler v.”
Coreen L. SPRAGUE v. Otis R. BOWEN, 812 F.2d 1226 (9th Cir. 1987). “20 C.F.R. § 404.1578 (1985); Dorton, 789 F.”
Bradley v. Bowen, 660 F. Supp. 276 (W.D. Ark. 1987). “1 *280 The regulations referred to in the statute are found in 20 C.F.R. § 404.1578 . They read as follows: (a) We will find that you are disabled and pay you widow’s or widower’s benefits as a widow, widower, or surviving divorced spouse if— (1) Your impairment(s) has specific…”
Daisy DORTON v. Margaret M. HECKLER, 789 F.2d 363 (6th Cir. 1986). “20 C.F.R. § 404.1578 (a)(1). An individual cannot qualify for widow’s disability benefits unless specific clinical findings show that she suffers from one of these impairments or that she suffers from one or more unlisted impairments that singly or in combination are the medical…”
Lorene H. Deters v. Sec'y of Health, 789 F.2d 1181 (5th Cir. 1986). “20 C.F.R. § 404.1578 (1985). 23 . 20 C.F.”
Esther Marcus v. Louis v. Sullivan, M.D., Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 926 F.2d 604 (7th Cir. 1991). “” 20 CFR § 404.1578 (a)(1) (emphasis supplied).”
James M. FARRELL v. Louis W. SULLIVAN, 878 F.2d 985 (7th Cir. 1989). “See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1578 (a)(1) (1988). Farrell claims that his impairments meet or are equivalent to the impairments set forth in section 1.”
Emma Jane PULLEN v. Otis R. BOWEN, 820 F.2d 105 (4th Cir. 1987). “20 C.F.R. § 404.1578 ; 20 C.F.R. § 416.920 (d).”
Jean M. Gallagher v. Richard S. Schweiker, 697 F.2d 82 (2d Cir. 1983). “1520 (d) (general disability claimants), 20 C.F.R. § 404.1578 (a)(1) (widow’s disability claimants).”
Floretta LAND v. Sec'y OF HEALTH & HUMAN Servs., 814 F.2d 241 (6th Cir. 1986). “20 C.F.R. § 404.1578 (a)(1) (1986). Plaintiff contends that she meets the impairments listed at sections 1.”
Rose M. Smith v. Richard Schweiker, 671 F.2d 789 (3d Cir. 1982). “20 C.F.R. § 404.1578 (a)(1). See also 20 C.”
Ruth Hansen v. Margaret M. Heckler, 783 F.2d 170 (10th Cir. 1986). “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.1578 (a)(1). 1 Hansen contends that she meets the criteria for a functional psychotic disorder listed in Appendix 1 at section 12.”
20 C.F.R. § 404.1578(a): 1 case
Cook ex rel. Cook v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 745 F. Supp. 1248 (E.D. Mich. 1990).
20 C.F.R. § 404.1578(a)(1): 1 case
Bryant v. Bowen, 683 F. Supp. 95 (D.N.J. 1988).
20 C.F.R. § 404.1578(a)(c): 1 case
Cook ex rel. Cook v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 745 F. Supp. 1248 (E.D. Mich. 1990).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.