Filed: Feb. 17, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-20493 Summary Calendar JOSEPH CALAIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas (97-CV-3499) - February 16, 2000 Before POLITZ, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Plaintiff-Appellant Joseph Calais appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Commissio
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-20493 Summary Calendar JOSEPH CALAIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas (97-CV-3499) - February 16, 2000 Before POLITZ, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Plaintiff-Appellant Joseph Calais appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Commission..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-20493
Summary Calendar
JOSEPH CALAIS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(97-CV-3499)
--------------------
February 16, 2000
Before POLITZ, WIENER, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Plaintiff-Appellant Joseph Calais appeals the district court’s
grant of summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner of Social
Security. Calais contends that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ)
did not properly apply Social Security Ruling 83-20 in determining
the onset date of his disability. He states that, because his
injury stemmed from a traumatic event, the onset date should have
been the date of his injury. Even if considered a disability of
non-traumatic origin, Calais contends that the ALJ should have
determined whether the alleged onset date was consistent with
Calais’s testimony, work history, and medical evidence.
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
We have reviewed the record and briefs submitted by the
parties and find that the ALJ’s decision was supported by
substantial evidence and the proper legal standards were used in
evaluating the evidence. Brock v. Chater,
84 F.3d 726, 727-28 (5th
Cir. 1996). The district court correctly determined that no
genuine issue of material fact exists.
AFFIRMED.
2