Filed: Mar. 21, 1996
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-20868 Summary Calendar _ ESTHER GARDNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus SHIRLEY S. CHATER, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-94-CV-3876 - - - - - - - - - - April 11, 1996 Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Esther Gardner appeals the district court's grant of summary judgmen
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 95-20868 Summary Calendar _ ESTHER GARDNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus SHIRLEY S. CHATER, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-94-CV-3876 - - - - - - - - - - April 11, 1996 Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Esther Gardner appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
__________________
No. 95-20868
Summary Calendar
__________________
ESTHER GARDNER,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
SHIRLEY S. CHATER,
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant-Appellee.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-94-CV-3876
- - - - - - - - - -
April 11, 1996
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Esther Gardner appeals the district court's grant of summary
judgment affirming the Commissioner of Social Security's
determination that Gardner is not disabled within the meaning of
the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. ยง 405(g). She argues that the
rejection of her testimony concerning the frequency and duration
of her transient ischemic attacks as not credible is not
supported by substantial evidence. We have reviewed the record
and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the
*
Pursuant to Local Rule 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule
47.5.4.
No. 95-20868
-2-
reasons stated by the district court. See Gardner v. Chater, No.
H-94-3876 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 8, 1995).
AFFIRMED.