Legislator Case Law & Legislation
DE FR IT EN
Analyze in Legislator
9C_374/2019 AI generated

Withdrawal of Appeal in Invalidity Insurance Case

Case Number 9C_374/2019
Court / Authority
Jurisdiction Switzerland · Federal Supreme Court (BGer / BGE) (CH)
Decision Date
Outcome struck_off
Open official source Machine-readable Markdown (.md)

Legislator summary

AI generated

The case involves an individual who had filed a complaint against a decision made by the Obergericht Appenzell Ausserrhoden concerning invalidity insurance process requirements. The complainant, represented by a lawyer, chose to withdraw the complaint, which was initially lodged on May 28, 2019, against the court's decision from February 19, 2019. Consequently, the Swiss Federal Tribunal, specifically its II. social law division, processed the withdrawal, resulting in the termination of the proceedings without imposing court costs. The relevant parties, including the Obergericht Appenzell Ausserrhoden and the Federal Office for Social Insurance, were notified of this decision.

Legislator headnote

AI generated

Art. 71 BGG, Art. 73 Abs. 1 BZP, Art. 32 Abs. 2 BGG, Art. 66 Abs. 2 BGG, Art. 71 Bst. BGG; Withdrawal of Appeal in Invalidity Insurance Case: The complainant, represented by a lawyer, chose to withdraw the complaint, which was initially lodged on May 28, 2019, against the court's decision from February 19, 2019. Consequently, the Swiss Federal Tribunal, specifically its II. social law division, processed the withdrawal, resulting in the termination of the proceedings without imposing court costs. The relevant parties, including the Obergericht Appenzell Ausserrhoden and the Federal Office for Social Insurance, were notified of this decision.

Keywords

AI generated
invalidity insurance withdrawal of insurance benefits invalidity proceedings and surrender filing of a claim social insurance dispute insolvency of the insurer

Cited Legislation

AI generated
Art. 71 BGG
dass die Beschwerde gemäss Art. 71 BGG in Verbindung mit Art.
Art. 73 Abs. 1 BZP
Cited in the reasoning as the basis for the decision to discontinue the proceedings upon withdrawal of the appeal, which forms the core of order 1.
Art. 32 Abs. 2 BGG
Cited in the reasoning to support the procedure applied for discontinuing the proceedings, as reflected in order 1.
Art. 66 Abs. 2 BGG
Cited as the basis for the order not to levy court fees (Order 2).
Art. 71 Bst. BGG
Cited in the reasoning as the basis for the decision to discontinue the proceedings upon withdrawal of the appeal, which forms the core of order 1.
AI generated
9C_477/2019
Withdrawal of Appeal in Invalidity Insurance Case
9C_438/2018
Appeal Withdrawal in Invalidity Insurance Case
8C_69/2008
Withdrawal of Appeal in Invalidity Insurance Case
9C_758/2008
Withdrawal of Appeal in Invalidity Insurance Case
9C_610/2017
Withdrawal of Appeal in Invalidity Insurance Case

Key legal questions extracted by Legislator

AI generated
Art. 32 Abs. 2 BGG

Cited in the reasoning to support the procedure applied for discontinuing the proceedings, as reflected in order 1.

Art. 66 Abs. 2 BGG

Cited as the basis for the order not to levy court fees (Order 2).

Art. 71 Bst. BGG

Cited in the reasoning as the basis for the decision to discontinue the proceedings upon withdrawal of the appeal, which forms the core of order 1.

Art. 73 Abs. 1 BZP

Cited in the reasoning as the basis for the decision to discontinue the proceedings upon withdrawal of the appeal, which forms the core of order 1.

Need to analyze how this precedent applies to your matter?

Cross-reference this judgment against statutes, commentaries, and subsequent citing case law inside Legislator AI.

Open in Legislator →

Subsequent Decisions Citing This Judgment (1)

OG O3V 18 32 (2019-02-19) · ar
Denial of Disability Pension Upheld Despite Conflicting Medical Opinions
«…rer gegen dieses Urteil erhobene Beschwerde an das Bundesgericht hat dieses mit Entscheid vom 17. Juli 2019 abgewiesen (9C_374/2019). Urteil vom 19. Februar 2019 Mitwirkende Obergerichtsvizepräsident W. Kobler…»

Full text

Bundesgericht

Tribunal fédéral

Tribunale federale

Tribunal federal

9C_374/2019

Verfügung vom 17. Juli 2019

II. sozialrechtliche Abteilung

Besetzung

Bundesrichterin Glanzmann, als Einzelrichterin,

Gerichtsschreiberin Fleischanderl.

Verfahrensbeteiligte

A.________,

vertreten durch Rechtsanwalt Max Imfeld,

Beschwerdeführer,

gegen

IV-Stelle Appenzell Ausserrhoden,

Neue Steig 15, 9100 Herisau,

Beschwerdegegnerin.

Gegenstand

Invalidenversicherung (Prozessvoraussetzung),

Beschwerde gegen den Entscheid

des Obergerichts Appenzell Ausserrhoden

vom 19. Februar 2019 (O3V 18 32).

Nach Einsicht

in das Schreiben vom 15. Juli 2019 (Poststempel), worin A.________ die Beschwerde vom 28. Mai 2019 (Poststempel) gegen den Entscheid des Obergerichts Appenzell Ausserrhoden vom 19. Februar 2019zurückziehen lässt,

in Erwägung,

dass die Beschwerde gemäss Art. 71 BGG in Verbindung mit Art. 73 Abs. 1 BZP im Verfahren nach Art. 32 Abs. 2 BGG abzuschreiben ist,

dass in Anwendung von Art. 66 Abs. 2 BGG auf die Erhebung von Gerichtskosten verzichtet wird,

verfügt die Einzelrichterin:

1. Das Verfahren wird infolge Rückzugs der Beschwerde abgeschrieben.

2. Es werden keine Gerichtskosten erhoben.

3. Diese Verfügung wird den Parteien, dem Obergericht Appenzell Ausserrhoden und dem Bundesamt für Sozialversicherungen schriftlich mitgeteilt.

Luzern, 17. Juli 2019

Im Namen der II. sozialrechtlichen Abteilung

des Schweizerischen Bundesgerichts

Die Einzelrichterin: Glanzmann

Die Gerichtsschreiberin: Fleischanderl