U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, 2000

Betty T. Whited v. Kenneth Apfel

Betty T. Whited v. Kenneth Apfel
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Decided October 4, 2000

Betty T. Whited v. Kenneth Apfel

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT ___________ No. 99-3879 ___________ Betty T. Whited, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner, * Eastern District of Arkansas.

Social Security Administration, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. * ___________ Submitted: September 29, 2000 Filed: October 4, 2000 ___________ Before BEAM, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges. ___________ PER CURIAM.

Betty Whited appeals the district court’s1 order affirming the Commissioner’s decision to deny her applications for disability insurance benefits and widow’s insurance benefits. For reversal, she contends the administrative law judge (ALJ) erred in finding that she could perform the full range of light work; the Appeals Council erred in rejecting as immaterial certain post-decision psychological and medical evaluations; The Honorable Henry L. Jones, Jr., United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). the ALJ erred in relying on the medical-vocational guidelines; and the ALJ failed to evaluate the combined effects of her impairments.

After careful consideration of the record and the parties’ submissions on appeal, we conclude substantial evidence in the record supports the ALJ’s finding that Whited could perform the full range of light work, even taking into consideration the post- decision evidence she submitted to the Appeals Council, see Cunningham v. Apfel, 222 F.3d 496, 500 (8th Cir. 2000). The record also shows that the ALJ considered, alone and in combination, the impairments as to which the record before the ALJ contained evidence. Finally, given the ALJ’s finding that Whited could perform the full range of light work, he did not err in relying on the medical-vocational guidelines to conclude White was not disabled.

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.

-2-

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