20 C.F.R. § 404.958
Notice of dismissal of a request for a hearing before an administrative law judge
We shall mail a written notice of the dismissal of the hearing request to all parties at their last known address. The notice will state that there is a right to request that the Appeals Council vacate the dismissal action.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 55
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1963–2021 · leading case: Luther D. Mullen v. Otis Bowen, Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., Richard G. Shepherd v. Otis Bowen, Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 800 F.2d 535 (6th Cir. 1986).
Luther D. Mullen v. Otis Bowen, Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., Richard G. Shepherd v. Otis Bowen, Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 800 F.2d 535 (6th Cir. 1986). “957 (b) *559 and 20 C.F.R. § 404.958 , which have since been modified (now codified at 20 C.”
UNITED STATES of Am., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gerhard T. BECK, M.D., Defendant-Appellant, 758 F.2d 1553 (11th Cir. 1985). “20 C.F.R. § 404.958 (a) (1975) (current version at 20 C.”
Charles PURTER, Appellant, v. Margaret HECKLER, Sec'y Dept. of Health & Human Servs., 771 F.2d 682 (3rd Cir. 1985). “at 212 (citing 20 C.F.R. § 404.958 (a)). Similarly, in Farley *694 v.”
Osmund McGowen v. Patricia R. Harris, Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 666 F.2d 60 (4th Cir. 1981). “Even though it is the same claim, the Secretary may nevertheless, within time limits and for “good cause” shown, reopen the claim and consider it on the merits, with or without new evidence.”
United States v. Lawrence P. Smith, 482 F.2d 1120 (8th Cir. 1973). “This reference is to 20 C.F.R. § 404.958 , defining “good cause” and must be read in conjunction with § 404.”
Owen C. Leviner v. Elliott L. Richardson, Sec'y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 443 F.2d 1338 (4th Cir. 1971). “957 which permits an administrative determination to be reopened within four years after the date of the notice thereof “upon a finding of good cause for reopening,” and to 20 C.F.R. § 404.958 which defines “good cause” to include, inter alia, error in the determination or…”
Gertie Wilson v. Joseph A. Califano, Sec'y, H.E.W., 580 F.2d 208 (6th Cir. 1978). “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.958 (a). A review of the record indicates that the ALJ, whose hearing decision constitutes the decision of the Secretary in this case, did reopen his earlier decision.”
Willie C. Wallace v. Caspar Weinberger, Sec'y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 528 F.2d 700 (6th Cir. 1976). “Dorgan were held not to be “new and material evidence” and thus not good cause for reopening within the definition contained in 20 C.F.R. § 404.958 . The district court further found that the other good cause for reopening asserted by the claimant — error on the face of the…”
Charles R. Webb v. Robert H. Finch, Sec'y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 431 F.2d 1179 (6th Cir. 1970). “20 C.F.R. 404.958. 9 I dissent also because I believe our function is to review the decision of the District Court and not to decide issues in the first instance.”
Arry Ortego v. Caspar Weinberger, Sec'y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 516 F.2d 1005 (5th Cir. 1975). “20 C.F.R. § 404.958 . “Error on the face of the evidence” is defined in the Social Security Claims Manual § 7015 (May 1970): .”
Reba U. Gaston v. Elliott L. Richardson, Sec'y, Health, Educ. & Welfare, 451 F.2d 461 (6th Cir. 1971). “20 C.F.R. § 404.958 (c) provides: “ ‘Good cause’ shall be deemed to exist where: ****** (c) There is an error as to such determination or decision on the face of *466 the evidence on which such determination or decision is based.”
John Easley v. Robert H. Finch, Sec'y of Health, Educ. & Welfare, 431 F.2d 1351 (4th Cir. 1970). “20 C.F.R. § 404.958 (c). 9 . According to figures kept by the Social Security Administration, there were 515,-938 disability claims processed in fiscal year 1968.”
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.