Michael L. Haynes v. Kenneth S. Apfel

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedOctober 12, 2000
Docket99-2994
StatusUnpublished

This text of Michael L. Haynes v. Kenneth S. Apfel (Michael L. Haynes v. Kenneth S. Apfel) 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
Michael L. Haynes v. Kenneth S. Apfel, (8th Cir. 2000).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________

No. 99-2994 ___________

Michael L. Haynes, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner, * Social Security Administration, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * ___________

Submitted: October 5, 2000 Filed: October 12, 2000 ___________

Before BEAM, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges. ___________

PER CURIAM.

Michael L. Haynes appeals the district court’s1 grant of summary judgment in favor of the Commissioner of Social Security, upholding the Commissioner’s cessation of Haynes’s disability insurance benefits based on a finding that alcoholism was a contributing factor material to his disability. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude substantial evidence supported the Commissioner’s

1 The Honorable Jerry W. Cavaneau, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). decision. See 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(2)(C) (“An individual shall not be considered to be disabled for purposes of this subchapter if alcoholism or drug addiction would . . . be a contributing factor material to the Commissioner’s determination that the individual is disabled.”); Pettit v. Apfel, 218 F.3d 901, 903 (8th Cir. 2000) (claimant has initial burden of showing that alcoholism or drug addiction is not material to finding of disability); Rehder v. Apfel, 205 F.3d 1056, 1059 (8th Cir. 2000) (standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-2-

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Michael L. Haynes v. Kenneth S. Apfel, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michael-l-haynes-v-kenneth-s-apfel-ca8-2000.