Steffey v. Barnhart

Fourth Circuit

Steffey v. Barnhart

113 F. App'x 547

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedNovember 24, 2004

DocketNo. 04-1382

StatusPublished

This text of 113 F. App'x 547 (Steffey 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

Steffey v. Barnhart, 113 F. App'x 547 (4th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Harold Steffey appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Commissioner in this action challenging the Commissioner’s denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Steffey v. Commissioner, No. CA-03-2 (W.D.Va. Feb. 5, 2004). 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

PER CURIAM:

Harold Steffey appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Commissioner in this action challenging the Commissioner’s denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Steffey v. Commissioner, No. CA-03-2 (W.D.Va. Feb. 5, 2004). 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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

113 F. App'x 547, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steffey-v-barnhart-ca4-2004.