Arline Alexander v. Donna E. Shalala, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services

48 F.3d 1223, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 11518, 1995 WL 60806
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 15, 1995
Docket94-2215
StatusPublished

This text of 48 F.3d 1223 (Arline Alexander v. Donna E. Shalala, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Arline Alexander v. Donna E. Shalala, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, 48 F.3d 1223, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 11518, 1995 WL 60806 (8th Cir. 1995).

Opinion

48 F.3d 1223
NOTICE: Eighth Circuit Rule 28A(k) governs citation of unpublished opinions and provides that no party may cite an opinion not intended for publication unless the cases are related by identity between the parties or the causes of action.

Arline ALEXANDER, Appellant,
v.
Donna E. SHALALA, Secretary of the Department of Health and
Human Services, Appellee.

No. 94-2215.

United States Court of Appeals,
Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 16, 1994.
Filed: Feb. 15, 1995.

Before BOWMAN and LOKEN, Circuit Judges, and BOGUE,* Senior District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Arline Alexander brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Sec. 405(g) for review of a final decision of the Secretary denying her claim for a period of disability and for disability insurance benefits. The District Court1 granted the Secretary's motion for summary judgment and dismissed Alexander's complaint with prejudice. Alexander appeals.

For reversal, Alexander argues that (1) the District Court erred in holding that substantial evidence supports the Secretary's decision, (2) the Administrative Law Judge failed to consider properly Alexander's treating physician's opinion, and (3) the ALJ failed to consider properly Alexander's subjective complaints and alleged nonexertional limitations.

Having considered the briefs and record, we conclude that no error of law appears and that the Secretary's decision denying Alexander's claim for disability benefits is supported by substantial evidence. As an opinion by this Court would lack precedential value, the judgment of the District Court is affirmed without further discussion.

AFFIRMED. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

*

The Honorable Andrew W. BOGUE, Senior United States District Judge for the District of South Dakota, sitting by designation

1

The Honorable Jerry W. Cavaneau, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, who conducted the proceedings and entered judgment pursuant to the consent of the parties in accordance with 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636(c)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
48 F.3d 1223, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 11518, 1995 WL 60806, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arline-alexander-v-donna-e-shalala-secretary-of-th-ca8-1995.