U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, 1999

Merideth v. Apfel, Commissioner

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · Decided March 16, 1999

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-2275

RUTH HUBBARD MERIDETH, a/k/a Ruth Hubbard Lovinsohn, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus

KENNETH S. APFEL, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Asheville. Max O. Cogburn, Magistrate Judge. (CA-97-190-1-C)

Submitted: March 11, 1999 Decided: March 16, 1999

Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ruth Hubbard Meredith, Appellant Pro Se. Joseph L. Brinkley, OF- FICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Ruth Merideth appeals from the magistrate judge’s order grant- ing the Commissioner’s motion for summary judgment on her claim for disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income.1 Our review of the record discloses that the Commissioner’s decision was based on substantial evidence and is without reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the magistrate judge.

See Merideth v. Apfel, No. CA-97-190-1-C (W.D.N.C. July 6, 1998).2 We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conten- tions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

1 The parties consented to the magistrate judge’s jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) (1994). 2 Although the magistrate judge’s order is marked as “filed” on July 2, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on July 6, 1998. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was physically entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the magistrate judge’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.