Summary
stating that the Commissioner's conclusions of law are only persuasive, not binding
Summary of this case from Bear Shield v. BarnhartOpinion
No. 79-1487.
Submitted January 15, 1980.
Decided January 30, 1980.
Sam Boyce, Newport, Ark., for appellant.
Stuart E. Schiffer, Acting Asst. Atty. Gen., Washington, D.C., W. H. Dillahunty, U.S. Atty., and Samuel A. Perroni, Asst. U.S. Atty., Little Rock, Ark., and Paula Mastropiere-Billingsley, Asst. Regional Atty., Dept. of Health, Education Welfare, Dallas, Tex., for appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
J. V. Satterfield appeals from a decision of the district court granting a motion for summary judgment in favor of the Secretary of Health Education and Welfare, thereby affirming the Secretary's decision to deny Satterfield disability insurance benefits. The denial was predicated on the Secretary's determination that appellant was not disabled within the meaning of the Social Security Act.
We have carefully examined the briefs and the record, and we affirm on the basis of the district court's opinion. Satterfield v. Mathews, 483 F. Supp. 20 (E.D.Ark. 1979). Substantial evidence supports the Secretary's determinations. Its denial of disability benefits was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of its discretion.
Affirmed.