Urban vs. Chater (5th Cir. 1997)

Federal Circuits, 5th Cir. (March 03, 1997)

Docket number: 96-20794

Permanent Link: http://vlex.com/vid/urban-vs-chater-18395430
Id. vLex: VLEX-18395430

Click here to download this article in graphic format (Acrobat Reader)

Document language

Request manual translation

Search in this document

Document options

Citations:

Loading article preview... cerrar

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - 49 Soc.Sec.Rep.Ser. 118, Unempl.Ins.Rep. (Cch) P 14848B Don E. Leggett, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Shirley E. Chater, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant-Appellee., 67 F.3d 558 (5th Cir. 1995)

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Cir. - 49 Soc.Sec.Rep.Ser. 112, Unempl.Ins.Rep. (Cch) P 14847B Travis Ripley, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Shirley S. Chater, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant-Appellee., 67 F.3d 552 (5th Cir. 1995)

See other documents that cite the same legislation

Text:

* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-20794 Summary Calendar SUSAN J. URBAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus SHIRLEY S. CHATER, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-94-4142 February 13, 1997 Before SMITH, DUHEÂ’ and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Susan J. Urban appeals the district court's decision in favor of the Commissioner, denying her disability insurance benefits and Supplemental Security Income. Urban argues that the Commissioner§§ 404.1520, 416.920 (1995); Leggett v. Chater , 67 F.3d 558, 563 n.2 (5th Cir. 1995).

Further, a review of the record reflects substantial evidence supporting the CommissionerÂ’s decision. See Ripley v. Chater , 67 F.3d 552, 555 (5th Cir. 1995).

UrbanÂ’s Â“Amended Motion for Remand Based on Incompetence of DefendantÂ’s Expert WitnessÂ” is DENIED.

AFFIRMED.

No. 96-20794 -