Hand v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration

Fourth Circuit

Hand v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration

57 F. App'x 596

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMarch 20, 2003

DocketNo. 02-2245

StatusPublished

This text of 57 F. App'x 596 (Hand v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hand v. Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, 57 F. App'x 596 (4th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Emma L. Hand seeks review of the magistrate judge’s order

* affirming the Commissioner’s denial of social security benefits pursuant to 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(f), 416.920(f) (2002). Our review of the record discloses that the Commissioner’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. In particular, we find that substantial evidence supports a finding that Hand is unable to meet the requirements of either 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, § 1.03 (1998) or 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, § 1.02 (2002). Accordingly, we affirm the magistrate judge’s order. Hand v. Commissioner of SSA, No. CA-01-38-4 (W.D.Va. Aug. 26, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

The parties consented to review by a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(2) (2000).

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

PER CURIAM.

Emma L. Hand seeks review of the magistrate judge’s order

* affirming the Commissioner’s denial of social security benefits pursuant to 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1520(f), 416.920(f) (2002). Our review of the record discloses that the Commissioner’s decision is based upon substantial evidence and is without reversible error. In particular, we find that substantial evidence supports a finding that Hand is unable to meet the requirements of either 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, § 1.03 (1998) or 20 C.F.R. Part 404, Subpart P, Appendix 1, § 1.02 (2002). Accordingly, we affirm the magistrate judge’s order. Hand v. Commissioner of SSA, No. CA-01-38-4 (W.D.Va. Aug. 26, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.

The parties consented to review by a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(2) (2000).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 F. App'x 596, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hand-v-commissioner-of-the-social-security-administration-ca4-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack