TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Ruby F. Cauthen v. Robert H. Finch, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare

Ruby F. CAUTHEN, Appellant, v. Robert H. FINCH, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, Appellee

Cauthen v. Finch, 426 F.2d 891 (4th Cir. 1970)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
June 3, 1970
Docket
No. 14209_1
Judges
Boreman, Bryan, Per Curiam, Winter
Citations
426 F.2d 8911970 U.S. App. LEXIS 8911

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

Upon review of the record and briefs in this appeal from the order of the district court affirming the Secretary’s finding that claimant is not entitled to social security disability benefits, we find oral argument unnecessary and summarily affirm.

Claimant presented two medical bases for her disability claim — a partial impairment of vision in one eye and an arthritic condition. Medical evidence reveals that appellant has 20/20 vision in one eye and vision corrected to 20/50 in the other, although the impaired eye does “water” excessively. The evidence reveals that the eye problem is one of long standing and that claimant has worked regularly for many years affected to virtually the same extent as at present. Medical evidence in the record reveals that the claimant’s arthritis affects only the little finger of each hand and that such condition would affect only her ability to perform work requiring fine hand movements. Claimant quit work of her own volition rather than upon the advice of doctors.

In short, there is substantial evidence to support the ultimate determination that claimant’s impairment does not meet the disability standards of the Social Security Act, that is, “ * * * inability to engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically determinable physical or mental impairment which can be expected to result in death or which has lasted or can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 12 months * *42 U.S.C. § 423 (d) (1) (A).

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 12 cases

View all citing references →
1979: 11983: 11987: 11988: 11996: 11997: 22000: 12001: 12016: 12019: 12020: 119792026peak 1997 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Thias M. MURPHY v. Otis R. BOWEN, Secretary of Health and Human Services810 F.2d 433 (4th Cir. 1987)
  2. Ronda S. CRAIG v. Shirley S. CHATER, Commissioner of Social Security76 F.3d 585 (4th Cir. 1996)
  3. Vega v. Colvin164 F. Supp. 3d 249 (D. Mass. 2016)
  4. Fulbright v. Apfel114 F. Supp. 2d 465 (W.D.N.C. 2000)
  5. Holguin v. Harris480 F. Supp. 1171 (N.D. Cal. 1979)
  6. Gladys Caroline Jones Gowen Tyree v. Otis R. Bowen, Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services841 F.2d 1123 (4th Cir. 1988)

Most recent

  1. Melissa Barbare v. Andrew SaulNo. 19-1503 (4th Cir. June 18, 2020)
  2. Murphy v. SaulNo. 2:18-cv-00688 (S.D.W. Va July 2, 2019)
  3. Vega v. Colvin164 F. Supp. 3d 249 (D. Mass. 2016)
  4. Freeman v. Halter141 F. Supp. 2d 592 (W.D.N.C. 2001)
  5. Fulbright v. Apfel114 F. Supp. 2d 465 (W.D.N.C. 2000)
  6. Hazel v. Chater, CommissionerNo. 96-1415 (4th Cir. May 2, 1997)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list