Esau Canterbury v. Michael Astrue, No. 08-2225 (4th Cir. 2009)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-2225 ESAU CANTERBURY, for ROMAN CANTERBURY, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner of Social Security, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. David A. Faber, Senior District Judge. (2:07-cv-00061) Submitted: July 10, 2009 Decided: July 23, 2009 Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Leonard Stayton, Inez, Kentucky, for Appellant. Eric P. Kressman, Acting Regional Chief Counsel, Rafael Melendez, Supervisory Attorney, Lori Karimoto, Assistant United States Attorney, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Charles T. Miller, United States Attorney, Carol A. Casto, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Esau Canterbury, magistrate Canterbury, appeals judge s the on behalf district of court s recommendation to his order grant the son, Roman accepting the Commissioner s motion for judgment on the pleadings and terminate his child s social security supplemental income benefits. We must uphold the district court s disability determination if it is supported by substantial evidence. 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (2009); Hays v. Sullivan, 907 F.2d 1453, 1456 (4th Cir. 1990). We have reviewed the record in light of Canterbury s arguments on appeal and find substantial evidence supports the condition cease. had Commissioner s improved such finding that that disability See 20 C.F.R. § 404.1594 (2009). the termination of benefits. the child s medical benefits should Accordingly, we affirm We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.