Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Hall v. Apfel, Commissioner, 00-2331 (2001)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 00-2331 Visitors: 5
Filed: Feb. 13, 2001
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2331 THOMAS HALL, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Big Stone Gap. James P. Jones, District Judge. (CA-99-159-2) Submitted: February 8, 2001 Decided: February 13, 2001 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thom
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-2331 THOMAS HALL, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Big Stone Gap. James P. Jones, District Judge. (CA-99-159-2) Submitted: February 8, 2001 Decided: February 13, 2001 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas Hall, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. James Anthony Winn, Assistant Regional Counsel, Anne von Scheven, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; John Francis Corcoran, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Thomas Hall, Jr., appeals the district court’s order affirming the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security. We have re- viewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Hall v. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security, No. CA-99-159-2 (W.D. Va. Sept. 28, 2000). 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 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