Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

394 F.2d 110

Docket No. 17603.

Weaver v. Gardner

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals

March 18, 1968.

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1968-03-18

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently October 1971

4 federal appellate · 2 district ·

2 counsel of record

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““Many witnesses testified on behalf of Ulis Weaver and in support of his contention that he was born in 1890. * * * The Secretary, however, relied in large part upon documentary evidence in support of his contrary finding that Ulis Weaver was born in 1905. Although the question of Ulis Weaver’s age is not entirely free of doubt, the Secretary’s findings are supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole, and are therefore conclusive.””

quoted by 1 later decision, including Matusiak v. Finch

Relies on Weaver v. Gardner

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1968-03-18

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Daniel J. Tribell, Middlesboro, Ky., for appellant.

J. T. Frankenberger, Asst. U.S. Atty., Lexington, Ky., George I. Cline, U.S. Atty., Lexington, Ky., on the brief, for appellee.

Before PECK and McCREE, Circuit Judges, and CECIL, Senior Circuit judge.

ORDER.

¶1

The issue confronting the Secretary in this case, which was similar to the one presented in the companion case involving appellant's deceased brother, Weaver, Admrx. v. Gardner, Sec., 6 Cir., 394 F.2d 111, was whether appellant had reached the age of 65 when he initially applied for Social Security benefits in 1957. The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky affirmed the Secretary's final decision against appellant, and this appeal followed.

¶2

As in his brother's case, appellant relied upon the testimony of numerous witnesses to support his claim that he was born in 1892. However, the Secretary's finding that appellant was born in 1910, or thereabouts, is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole, and is therefore conclusive. 42 U.S.C. 405(g). The Secretary's further finding that appellant was not without fault in causing the overpayments is likewise supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole, and is conclusive on review. Accordingly,

¶3

It is ordered that the judgment of the District Court be and hereby is affirmed.

/394/f2d/110 · .json · Public domain