Dewerff v. Social Security Administration , 123 F. App'x 250 ( 2005 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 04-1719
    ___________
    Susan G. Dewerff,                     *
    *
    Appellant,               *
    *
    v.                              * Appeal from the United States
    * District Court for the
    Social Security Administration;       * District of South Dakota.
    Commissioner of Social Security;      *
    United States Attorney; Attorney      * [UNPUBLISHED]
    General of the United States,         *
    *
    Appellees.               *
    ___________
    Submitted: January 27, 2005
    Filed: February 9, 2005
    ___________
    Before BYE, RILEY, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Susan Dewerff appeals the district court’s1 order and judgment affirming the
    suspension of her supplemental security income (SSI) from November 1998 through
    April 2000, based on a finding that Dewerff had more than $2,000 in nonexcludable
    1
    The Honorable Lawrence L. Piersol, Chief Judge, United States District Court
    for the District of South Dakota, adopting the report and recommendations of the
    Honorable John E. Simko, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of South
    Dakota.
    resources. See 20 C.F.R. § 416.1205 (2004) (disabled individual with no spouse is
    eligible for SSI only if her nonexcludable resources do not exceed $2,000).
    Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude the administrative law
    judge’s (ALJ’s) decision to deny benefits--based on the ALJ’s determination that
    Dewerff failed to provide credible evidence that she had “spent down” her excess
    resources below the $2,000 threshold--is supported by substantial evidence in the
    record as a whole. See Zeiler v. Barnhart, 
    384 F.3d 932
    , 935 (8th Cir. 2004) (appeals
    court affirms denial of benefits where substantial evidence in record as whole
    supports ALJ’s decision); Gregg v. Barnhart, 
    354 F.3d 710
    , 714 (8th Cir. 2003) (if
    ALJ expressly discredits claimant, and gives good reasons for doing so, court will
    normally defer to credibility assessment); Hudson v. Bowen, 
    849 F.2d 433
    , 434 (9th
    Cir. 1988) (in calculating whether claimant spent down excess resources for purposes
    of SSI, ALJ may disregard self-serving statements that cannot be verified).
    Accordingly, we affirm.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 04-1719

Citation Numbers: 123 F. App'x 250

Judges: Bye, Riley, Colloton

Filed Date: 2/9/2005

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024