Hensley v. Califano

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Aug. 23, 1979.

2 counsel of record

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“refusals to reopen and determinations that a claim is res judicata are not reviewable”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Robertson v. Bowen

Relies on Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York · Matos v. Secretary of Health

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1979-08-23

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently June 2006 · most notably Santana-Figueroa v. Immigration & Naturalization Service (1981), Osuchukwu v. Immigration & Naturalization Service (1984)

26 federal appellate ·

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Thomas F. Condon, Pensacola, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant.

Emory O. Williams, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Pensacola, Fla., Alan M. Grochal, Baltimore, Md., for defendant-appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida.

Before CLARK, GEE and HILL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

This is an attempted appeal from administrative denial of a Social Security disability claim on grounds of res judicata. The Secretary also refused to reopen earlier claims. Such refusals to reopen and determinations that a claim is res judicata are not reviewable. Matos v. Secretary of H.E.W., 581 F.2d 282 (1st Cir. 1978). The court below correctly dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

¶2

AFFIRMED.

Rule 18, 5 Cir.; See Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al., 5 Cir., 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I