Hitchens v. Colvin
This text of 627 F. App'x 238 (Hitchens v. Colvin) 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.
Opinion
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Irene Hitchens appeals the district court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and upholding the Commissioner’s denial of Hitchens’ applications for disability benefits and supplemental security income. Our review of the Commissioner’s determination is limited to evaluating whether the findings are supported by substantial evidence and whether the correct law was applied. See Mascio v. Colvin, 780 F.3d 632, 634 (4th Cir.2015).
We have thoroughly reviewed the parties’ briefs, the administrative record, and the joint appendix, and we discern no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. Hitchens v. Colvin, No. 7:13-cv-00040-FL, 2014 WL 6977765 (E.D.N.C. Dec. 9, 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. '
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
627 F. App'x 238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hitchens-v-colvin-ca4-2015.