UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
December 10, 1998
DARLENE ESPOSITO, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
UNITED STATES, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE.
Before Rich, Newman, and Rader, Circuit Judges.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Per Curiam.
Ms. Esposito appeals from an order of the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing her complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We affirm.
Ms. Esposito claimed that social security payments that she had received as a result of an automobile accident were wrongly terminated by the State of New Jersey. The Court of Federal Claims dismissed her complaint because it lacks subject matter jurisdiction over claims for Social Security Benefits.
The Social Security Act provides that for review of any final action of the Commissioner of Social Security, an action
"shall be brought in the district court of the United States for the judicial district in which the plaintiff resides, or has his principal place of business, or, if he does not reside or have his principal place of business within any such judicial district, in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia." 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (1994).
The Social Security Act also provides that:
"No findings of fact or decision of the Commissioner of Social Security shall be reviewed by any person, tribunal, or governmental agency except as herein provided." 42 U.S.C. § 405(h) (1994).
Therefore, the Court of Federal Claims correctly concluded that only the district court had jurisdiction to review a decision for benefits by the Commissioner of Social Security.
© 1999 VersusLaw Inc.