Marilyn Boley v. Carolyn W. Colvin
2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 14989
| 7th Cir. | 2014Background
- Marilyn Boley applied for Social Security disability benefits; SSA denied initially and on reconsideration.
- SSA failed to notify Boley’s attorney of the reconsideration denial as required by regulation; Boley, ill and preparing for surgery, missed the 60-day deadline to request an ALJ hearing.
- After discovering the missed notice, Boley’s attorney requested a hearing; the ALJ denied the late-filed request for lack of “good cause” based on written submissions and issued a final decision without oral testimony.
- Boley sued for judicial review; the district court dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, reasoning §405(g) permits review only of agency decisions made “after a hearing.”
- The Seventh Circuit reversed, overruling Watters v. Harris, and held §405(g) permits judicial review of final agency decisions made after the procedures the agency elects; remanded to evaluate whether substantial evidence and proper procedures supported the ALJ’s finding of no good cause.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether §405(g) bars judicial review when SSA issues a final decision without an oral hearing | Boley: §405(g) allows review of any final decision; “hearing” includes the agency process used to reach a final decision | SSA: “Hearing” means an oral hearing; absent one, §405(g) precludes review except for constitutional claims | Court: §405(g) permits review of final decisions reached by the procedures the agency elects; absence of oral hearing does not bar review |
| Whether Watters v. Harris remains controlling | Boley: Watters is wrongly decided and conflicts with Supreme Court precedents | SSA: Watters controls Seventh Circuit law | Held: Overrules Watters as inconsistent with Salfi and Eldridge; Watters is incorrect |
| Whether constitutional claims are required to obtain review when no oral hearing held | Boley: Due Process requires an oral hearing on good-cause claim and proper notice to counsel | SSA: Judicial review should be limited absent oral hearing; constitutional claims distinguishable | Court: Courts should avoid unnecessary constitutional rulings; meaning of regulatory “good cause” and need for hearing governed by APA and regulations first |
| Standard for reviewing ALJ refusal to extend time for seeking ALJ review (good cause) | Boley: SSA’s failure to notify counsel and her medical condition establish good cause for belated request | SSA: No good cause; claimant received notice herself and could have acted | Held: Remanded for consideration whether record contains substantial evidence and appropriate procedures supporting the ALJ’s no-good-cause ruling |
Key Cases Cited
- Weinberger v. Salfi, 422 U.S. 749 (1975) (agency may resolve claims without oral hearing and such decisions remain reviewable under §405(g))
- Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976) (distinguishes jurisdictional requirement to present a claim to the agency from waivable exhaustion rules)
- Califano v. Sanders, 430 U.S. 99 (1977) (held §405(g) does not permit review of denials to reopen final judgments; limits on repetitive review)
- Watters v. Harris, 656 F.2d 234 (7th Cir. 1980) (overruled) (held no judicial review where agency declined oral hearing)
- McNatt v. Apfel, 201 F.3d 1084 (9th Cir. 2000) (agency decision without live testimony can still be treated as a “hearing” for review purposes)
- Shrader v. Harris, 631 F.2d 297 (4th Cir. 1980) (treated agency denial on the merits as reviewable and remanded where substantial evidence lacking)