Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Bledsoe v. Commissioner of SSA, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    6 views2 pages
    Kathy Bledsoe appealed the district court's decision granting summary judgment to the Commissioner of Social Security in denying Bledsoe's application for disability insurance benefits. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the case and found no errors, affirming the district court's ruling. The appellate court determined the administrative law judge's decision was reasonable based on the evidence and that oral arguments were not necessary, so they affirmed the lower court's judgment without hearing additional arguments.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2002-01-15 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 01-1747

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Kathy Bledsoe appealed the district court's decision granting summary judgment to the Commissioner of Social Security in denying Bledsoe's application for disability insurance benefits. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the case and found no errors, affirming the district court's ruling. The appellate court determined the administrative law judge's decision was reasonable based on the evidence and that oral arguments were not necessary, so they affirmed the lower court's judgment without hearing additional arguments.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    6 views2 pages

    Bledsoe v. Commissioner of SSA, 4th Cir. (2002)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Kathy Bledsoe appealed the district court's decision granting summary judgment to the Commissioner of Social Security in denying Bledsoe's application for disability insurance benefits. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the case and found no errors, affirming the district court's ruling. The appellate court determined the administrative law judge's decision was reasonable based on the evidence and that oral arguments were not necessary, so they affirmed the lower court's judgment without hearing additional arguments.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 01-1747

    KATHY M. BLEDSOE,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    versus
    COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
    ADMINISTRATION,
    Defendant - Appellee.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
    District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert Earl Maxwell, Senior
    District Judge. (CA-00-43-2)

    Submitted:

    December 17, 2001

    Decided:

    January 15, 2002

    Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.


    Susan Kipp McLaughlin, MCLAUGHLIN & CURRY, Fairmont, West Virginia,
    for Appellant. James A. Winn, Regional Chief Counsel, Region III,
    Patricia M. Smith, Deputy Chief Counsel, Nicholas Cerulli, Assistant Regional Counsel, Office of the General Counsel, SOCIAL
    SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Patrick M.
    Flatley, United States Attorney, Helen Campbell Altmeyer, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Kathy M. Bledsoe appeals the district courts order granting
    summary judgment to the Commissioner in her action seeking judicial
    review of the Commissioners decision to deny Bledsoes application
    for disability insurance benefits.

    We have reviewed the record,

    the district courts opinion, and the decision of the administrative law judge and find no reversible error.

    Accordingly, we

    affirm on the reasoning of the district court.

    Bledsoe v. Com-

    missioner of Social Security, No. CA-00-43-2 (N.D. W. Va. Mar. 28,


    2001).

    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the


    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like