Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

William Martin v. Carolyn Colvin, 15-1422 (2017)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Number: 15-1422 Visitors: 27
Filed: Jan. 13, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1422 WILLIAM JOHNNY MARTIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (5:14-cv-00032-RLV) Submitted: December 19, 2016 Decided: January 13, 2017 Before DUNCAN and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opini
More
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-1422 WILLIAM JOHNNY MARTIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees, District Judge. (5:14-cv-00032-RLV) Submitted: December 19, 2016 Decided: January 13, 2017 Before DUNCAN and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michelle Fecio, Paul B. Eaglin, OLINSKY LAW GROUP, Syracuse, New York, for Appellant. Jill Westmoreland Rose, United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina; Marc D. Epstein, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland; Paul Taylor, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: William Johnny Martin appeals the district court’s order upholding the Commissioner’s denial of his applications for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm. Martin v. Colvin, No. 5:14-cv-00032-RLV (W.D.N.C. Apr. 9, 2015). 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