Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

William Harrison v. Commissioner of Social Security, 14-1572 (2014)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 14-1572 Visitors: 9
Filed: Dec. 18, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1572 WILLIAM HENRY HARRISON, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:11-cv-00091-REP) Submitted: November 25, 2014 Decided: December 18, 2014 Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William H
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-1572 WILLIAM HENRY HARRISON, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:11-cv-00091-REP) Submitted: November 25, 2014 Decided: December 18, 2014 Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Henry Harrison, Appellant Pro Se. Jonathan Holland Hambrick, Robin Perrin Meier, Assistant United States Attorneys, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: William Henry Harrison appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, granting summary judgment to the Commissioner, and upholding the Commissioner’s decision granting Harrison’s application for supplemental security income but denying his application for disability insurance benefits. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Harrison v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., No. 3:11-cv-00091-REP (E.D. Va. Jan. 16, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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