Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-87-01839/USCOURTS-ca10-87-01839-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 

---

PUBLISH 

- UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

TENTH CIRCUIT 

SANDRA EVERHART, THOMAS EVERHART, 

and MYRON ZENICK, on behalf of 

themselves and all others 

similarly situated, 

Plaintiffs-Appellees, 

FI LED 

United States Court of Appeals 

TPf"\th Ci:-':1.d: 

APR 1 IJ 1990 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

v. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

} 

) 

} 

) 

No. 87-1839 

BERLINE WISE and EMIL S. ZWEIZEN, 

v. 

Plaintiffs-IntervenorsAppellees, 

LOUIS w. SULLIVAN, M.D., Secretary) 

of Health and Human Services, ) 

and GWENDOLYN S. KING, Commissioner} 

of the Social Seburity Admini- } 

stration, in their official } 

capacities, } 

Defendants-Appellants. 

} 

} 

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

(D.C. No. 85-2590} 

Michael Kimmel (Richard K. Willard, Assistant Attorney General, 

Washington, D.C., Robert N. Miller, United States Attorney, 

Denver, Colorado, and William Kanter with him on the brief}, 

Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for DefendantsAppellants. 

Linda J. Olson (Daniel M. Taubman, Colorado Coalition of Legal 

Services Programs, Denver, Colorado, and R. Eric Solem with her on 

the brief}, Legal Aid Society of Metropolitan Denver, Denver, 

Colorado, for Plaintiffs-Appellees. 

Appellate Case: 87-1839 Document: 01019830142 Date Filed: 04/16/1990 Page: 1 
Before HOLLOWAY, Chief Judge, TIMBERS* and BALDOCK, Circuit 

Judges. 

PER CURIAM. 

In Sullivan v. Everhart, 110 S. Ct. 960 (1990), the Supreme 

Court reversed this court's determination in Everhart v. Bowen, 

853 F.2d 1532 (10th Cir. 1988), that the Secretary's netting 

regulations, 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.504 and 416.538, were invalid due to 

inconsistency with the underlying statutes, 42 u.s.c. 

§§ 404(a)(l)(A), (B) & 404(b) and 42 u.s.c. §§1383(b)(l)(A) & (B). 

In Everhart v. Bowen, 853 F.2d at 1539, we affirmed the district 

court's resolution of this issue, but reversed the district 

court's entry of a statewide injunction prohibiting application of 

the regulations. In-reverstng our judgment, the Supreme Court 

held that the regulations reflected a permissible construction of 

the statutes involved and that the definition of the netting 

period contained in the regulations did not render the netting 

procedure arbitrary and capricious. Sullivan v. Everhart, 110 s. 

Ct. at 966-67. 

The Court did not address the plaintiffs' contention that the 

regulations violate due process, because this court had not done 

so. Id. at 967-68; see also Everhart v. Bowen, 853 F.2d at 1533 

(describing constitutional claim). The Court remanded the case to 

this court for further proceedings. We, in turn, VACATE the 

* The Honorable William H. Timbers, United States Court of 

Appeals for the Second Circuit, sitting by designation. 

-2-

Appellate Case: 87-1839 Document: 01019830142 Date Filed: 04/16/1990 Page: 2 
district court's ruling invalidating the netting regulations and 

entry of the statewide injunction and REMAND to the district court 

for consideration of the plaintiffs' constitutional claim. 

SO ORDERED. 

-3-

Appellate Case: 87-1839 Document: 01019830142 Date Filed: 04/16/1990 Page: 3