Cox v. Social ( 1997 )

USCA1 Opinion

                                [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]



                            UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                                FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

                                 ____________________





        No. 97-1219





                                   BARBARA M. COX,



                                Plaintiff, Appellant,



                                          v.



                     SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION COMMISSIONER,



                                 Defendant, Appellee.



                                 ____________________





                     APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT



                              FOR THE DISTRICT OF MAINE



                       [Hon. Gene Carter, U.S. District Judge]
___________________



                                 ____________________



                                        Before



                               Selya, Boudin and Lynch,

                                   Circuit Judges.
______________



                                 ____________________



            Francis M. Jackson on brief for appellant.
__________________

            Jay  P.  McCloskey,  United  States  Attorney,  David  R. Collins,
__________________                              _________________

        Assistant  United States  Attorney, and  Thomas  D. Ramsey,  Assistant
_________________

        Regional Counsel, Region  I, Social Security Administration,  on brief

        for appellee.





                                 ____________________



                                  November 26, 1997

                                 ____________________































                      Per Curiam.  Claimant-appellant Barbara Cox appeals
__________



            from   a  judgment  of   the  district  court   adopting  the



            Magistrate's  report   and   affirming  an   order   of   the



            Commissioner of Social Security that  Cox was not entitled to



            disability  benefits.   Having carefully reviewed  the record



            and  the parties'  briefs,  we  reject  each  of  appellant's



            assignments  of error under Social Security Ruling 83-20, and



            affirm   substantially  for   the  reasons   stated  in   the



            Magistrate's thorough report  of December 16,  1996.  We  add



            here  only  that,  contrary  to  appellant's suggestion,  the



            Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ's) decision contains findings



            adequate to permit  effective review of his  determination as



            to appellant's credibility, and there was no prejudice in the



            ALJ's  failure to  separately  mention appellant's  husband's



            affidavit.   See Stein  v. Sullivan, 966  F.2d 317,  319 (7th
___ _____     ________



            Cir. 1992) (noting that the level of articulation required in



            an  ALJ's  decision  is  not  precise).    The  finding  that



            appellant did not  demonstrate the onset  of a severe  mental



            impairment prior to  the expiration of her insured  status is



            supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole.



                      Affirmed.
________























                                         -2-