Clements v. Chater, 95-30758 (2004)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Number: 95-30758
Visitors: 6
Filed: Mar. 25, 2004
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS for the Fifth Circuit _ No. 95-30758 Summary Calendar _ CHARLES L. CLEMENTS, Plaintiff-Appellant, VERSUS SHIRLEY S. CHATER, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellee. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana (92-CV-1688) _ February 14, 1996 Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Charles Clements appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment to the Commi
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS for the Fifth Circuit _ No. 95-30758 Summary Calendar _ CHARLES L. CLEMENTS, Plaintiff-Appellant, VERSUS SHIRLEY S. CHATER, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellee. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana (92-CV-1688) _ February 14, 1996 Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Charles Clements appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment to the Commis..
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS for the Fifth Circuit _____________________________________ No. 95-30758 Summary Calendar _____________________________________ CHARLES L. CLEMENTS, Plaintiff-Appellant, VERSUS SHIRLEY S. CHATER, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellee. ______________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana (92-CV-1688) ______________________________________________________ February 14, 1996 Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Charles Clements appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment to the Commissioner. He maintains the district court erred in affirming the Commissioner's decision to deny him social security disability benefits. After reviewing the record, we are persuaded that the Administrative Law Judge was entitled to conclude that Clements had failed to prove he was not substantially gainfully employed. We affirm. AFFIRMED * Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.
Source: CourtListener
