On August 26, 1962, Mr. Arnold filed a claim for a period on disability and disability insurance benefits. His claim was denied, and he required a hearing before a judicial officer (at the time they were called “Hearing Examiners”, though now they are called “Administrative Law Judges”).

After a hearing, the Examiner issued a decision that was unfavorable to Mr. Arnold. He appealed this decision to the Appeals Council, which declined to review his case. He was notified by letter of a sixty- day appeal right, during which period he could institute a civil action in federal district court. But he did not file such a lawsuit.

Mr. Arnold filed a new claim for a period of disability benefits for the same time period and with the same allegations as his prior case. His claim was denied, and he requested a hearing. His hearing request was dismissed.

He appealed to federal district court.

The Court held that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the matter because there was no final decision. Mr. Arnold’s hearing request had been dismissed on the grounds of res judicata, meaning that issue had already been decided.

The doctrine of Res Judicata applies to bar a subsequent action by the same party on the same facts with the same issues which have already been decided.

Basically, it means you don’t get a second bite of the same apple. 🍎 In the Social Security disability context, I would sum it up as: appeal, appeal, and appeal some more until you win your case. Once you have exhausted your appeals, you can consider filing a new case but it will be important to have new facts and new evidence in support of your claim.

See Arnold v. Celebrezze, U.S.D.C., N.D. Ala., S. Div., 63 Civ. No. 271 (09/25/63) (CCH U.I.R. Fed. Par. 16,044.

See also Social Security Ruling (SSR) 65-7c.

This material should not be construed as legal advice for any particular fact situation but is intended for general informational purposes only. For advice specific to any individual situation, an experienced attorney should be contacted.