Joshua McEntire v. Carolyn W. Colvin, No. 13-3623 (8th Cir. 2014)

 Annotate this Case

Court Description: Civil case - Social Security. Denial of disability benefits was supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. [ June 23, 2014

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 13-3623 ___________________________ Joshua D. McEntire lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of the Social Security Administration lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas - Harrison ____________ Submitted: June 19, 2014 Filed: June 24, 2014 [Unpublished] ____________ Before GRUENDER, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Joshua D. McEntire appeals from an order of the District Court1 affirming the denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. Upon de novo review, we find that the denial of benefits is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. See Myers v. Colvin, 721 F.3d 521, 524 (8th Cir. 2013). Specifically, we find no merit to McEntire s challenges to the administrative law judge s (ALJ s) credibility determination, see Halverson v. Astrue, 600 F.3d 922, 931 32 (8th Cir. 2010) (noting that ALJ may discount claimant s subjective complaints if there are inconsistencies in the record as whole); or to the ALJ s residual functional capacity (RFC) findings, see Perks v. Astrue, 687 F.3d 1086, 1092 (8th Cir. 2012) (noting that medical records, physician observations, and claimant s subjective statements about his capabilities are considerations in RFC findings and that RFC findings must also be supported by some medical evidence). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the District Court. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable Erin Setser, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(c). -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.