Filed: May 07, 1999
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 98-3551 _ Douglas J. Sample, * * Plaintiff - Appellant, * * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Southern * District of Iowa. * Kenneth Apfel, Acting Commissioner * [UNPUBLISHED] of Social Security Administration, * * Defendant - Appellee. * _ Submitted: April 20, 1999 Filed: May 7, 1999 _ Before BEAM and HANSEN, Circuit Judges, and KOPF,1 District Judge. _ PER CURIAM. Douglas Sample appeals from the district cour
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 98-3551 _ Douglas J. Sample, * * Plaintiff - Appellant, * * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Southern * District of Iowa. * Kenneth Apfel, Acting Commissioner * [UNPUBLISHED] of Social Security Administration, * * Defendant - Appellee. * _ Submitted: April 20, 1999 Filed: May 7, 1999 _ Before BEAM and HANSEN, Circuit Judges, and KOPF,1 District Judge. _ PER CURIAM. Douglas Sample appeals from the district court..
More
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 98-3551 ___________ Douglas J. Sample, * * Plaintiff - Appellant, * * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the Southern * District of Iowa. * Kenneth Apfel, Acting Commissioner * [UNPUBLISHED] of Social Security Administration, * * Defendant - Appellee. * ___________ Submitted: April 20, 1999 Filed: May 7, 1999 ___________ Before BEAM and HANSEN, Circuit Judges, and KOPF,1 District Judge. ___________ PER CURIAM. Douglas Sample appeals from the district court’s2 order affirming the Commissioner’s decision denying him supplemental security income under Title XVI 1 The Honorable Richard G. Kopf, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska, sitting by designation. 2 The Honorable Charles R. Wolle, Chief United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa. of the Social Security Act. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude that the decision of the Commissioner is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole and that Sample is not entitled to supplemental security income. Because an extended opinion would serve no useful purpose in this fact-intensive case, we affirm the decision of the district court without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT. -2-