919 F.3d 1033
8th Cir.2019Background
- Dennis Thompson applied in 2013 for Social Security disability benefits; the ALJ denied relief and the Appeals Council denied review by letter dated July 27, 2015.
- Appeals Council notice stated a claimant has 60 days (presumed receipt +5 days) to file a civil action in federal district court; Thompson later received a 30-day extension, giving a deadline of December 18, 2015.
- Thompson’s wife mailed two letters before the extended deadline, but she sent them to the Social Security Administration (requesting review) rather than filing a complaint in the U.S. District Court.
- After the deadline passed, the SSA acknowledged receipt of the wife’s submissions and Thompson’s wife then attempted to obtain another extension; Thompson filed a pro se complaint in district court on April 18, 2016.
- The Commissioner moved to dismiss under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) as time-barred; the district court granted the motion. On appeal, the sole contested issue was whether Thompson was entitled to equitable tolling of the statutory filing period.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether equitable tolling applies to extend § 405(g) filing deadline | Thompson argued equitable tolling applies because he (via his wife) timely filed in the wrong forum, suffered mental incapacity, and later experienced agency misdirection | Commissioner argued no extraordinary circumstance prevented timely filing; misfiling to SSA was the claimant’s error and mental issues did not prevent timely action | Court held no equitable tolling: delay was not caused by an extraordinary external obstacle and claimant was responsible for the late filing |
Key Cases Cited
- Pace v. DiGuglielmo, 544 U.S. 408 (establishes two-part equitable tolling test requiring diligence and extraordinary circumstance)
- Burnett v. New York Central R.R. Co., 380 U.S. 424 (plaintiff timely filed in state court; Court allowed equitable tolling in that context)
- Herb v. Pitcairn, 325 U.S. 77 (timely filing in state court treated as timely if state court could transfer to proper forum)
- Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 498 U.S. 89 (equitable tolling not available for garden-variety excusable neglect)
- Jackson v. Astrue, 506 F.3d 1349 (11th Cir. applying Pace test to § 405(g) equitable tolling)
- Torres v. Barnhart, 417 F.3d 276 (2d Cir. applying Pace test to § 405(g) equitable tolling)
- Lyons v. Potter, 521 F.3d 981 (mental illness tolling standard is high)
- Jessie v. Potter, 516 F.3d 709 (mental condition must prevent understanding/managing affairs to justify tolling)
- Bowen v. City of New York, 476 U.S. 467 (jurisdictional principles cited for appellate review)