Blackwell v. Chater, Commissioner
Blackwell v. Chater, Commissioner
Opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-2563
GERALDINE BLACKWELL,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
SHIRLEY S. CHATER, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (CA-95-95-5)
Submitted: March 31, 1999 Decided: October 7, 1999
Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HALL,* Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charles McB. Sasser, Margaret B. DeVries, COX, GAGE & SASSER, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Mark T. Calloway, United States Attorney, Joseph L. Brinkley, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
* Senior Judge Hall was assigned to the panel in this case but died prior to the time the decision was filed. The decision is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 46(d). Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Geraldine Blackwell appeals the district court’s order affirm-
ing the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying
disability benefits. We have reviewed the record and the district
court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we
affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Blackwell v.
Chater, No. CA-95-95-5 (W.D.N.C. Aug. 14, 1998).* We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequate-
ly presented in the materials before the court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
* Although the district court’s judgment is marked as “filed” on August 10, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on August 14. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the judgment was physically entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray,
806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35(4th Cir. 1986).
2
Reference
- Status
- Unpublished