Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Parks v. Apfel, Commissioner, 98-2417 (1999)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 98-2417 Visitors: 8
Filed: Apr. 23, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2417 WILLIAM G. PARKS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Beckley. Mary S. Feinberg, Magistrate Judge. (CA-97-900-5) Submitted: April 6, 1999 Decided: April 23, 1999 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Carme
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2417 WILLIAM G. PARKS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of West Virginia, at Beckley. Mary S. Feinberg, Magistrate Judge. (CA-97-900-5) Submitted: April 6, 1999 Decided: April 23, 1999 Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Carmen S. Rasmussen, Sophia, West Virginia, for Appellant. James A. Winn, Chief Counsel, Region III, Patricia M. Smith, Deputy Chief Counsel, Connie Hoffman-Healey, Assistant Regional Counsel, Office of the General Counsel, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Phila- delphia, Pennsylvania; Rebecca A. Betts, United States Attorney, Stephen M. Horn, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: William Parks appeals the magistrate judge’s order granting the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment in this action seek- ing disability benefits.* We have reviewed the record and the mag- istrate judge’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the magistrate judge. See Parks v. Apfel, No. CA-97-900-5 (S.D.W. Va., Aug. 21, 1998). Because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate- rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process, we dispense with oral argument and grant Parks’ motion to submit this appeal on the briefs. AFFIRMED * The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(2) (1994). 2
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer