Rose ex rel. Rose v. Barnhart

50 F. App'x 613
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedNovember 8, 2002
DocketNo. 02-1329
StatusPublished

This text of 50 F. App'x 613 (Rose ex rel. Rose v. Barnhart) 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
Rose ex rel. Rose v. Barnhart, 50 F. App'x 613 (4th Cir. 2002).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Ethel Rose, on behalf of Taevon Rose, appeals the district court’s order affirming [614]*614the Commissioner’s termination of children’s supplemental security income benefits. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. We must uphold the district court’s disability determination if it is supported by substantial evidence. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (2000); Hays v. Sullivan, 907 F.2d 1453, 1456 (4th Cir.1990). There is substantial evidence in the record for the district court’s decision to terminate benefits based upon medical improvement and lack of current disability. 20 C.F.R. §§ 416.924, 416.994a(c) (2000). Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Rose v. Barnhart, No. CA-01-1055-H (D.Md. March 6, 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.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
50 F. App'x 613, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rose-ex-rel-rose-v-barnhart-ca4-2002.