Rodney Bell v. Carolyn W. Colvin, No. 13-1226 (8th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Civil case - Social Security. Determination that claimant was not disabled is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole.
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 13-1226 ___________________________ Rodney Bell lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commissioner of Social Security lllllllllllllllllllllAppellee ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________ Submitted: August 7, 2013 Filed: August 27, 2013 [Unpublished] ____________ Before SMITH, BOWMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Rodney Bell appeals from an order of the District Court1 affirming the denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. Upon de novo 1 The Honorable Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr., Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri. review, we find that the determination of the administrative law judge (ALJ) that Bell is not disabled is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. See Young v. Astrue, 702 F.3d 489, 491 (8th Cir. 2013). As to Bell s apparent challenge to the ALJ s adverse credibility determination, this challenge is being raised for the first time on appeal, see Roberts v. Apfel, 222 F.3d 466, 470 (8th Cir. 2000) (noting that unless manifest injustice would result, a claim not articulated in the district court is subject to forfeit on appeal), and in any event, the ALJ gave several valid reasons for finding Bell not entirely credible, see Renstrom v. Astrue, 680 F.3d 1057, 1067 (8th Cir. 2012) (stating that if the ALJ explicitly discredits a claimant and gives good reasons for doing so, the appellate court will normally defer to the ALJ s determination). We affirm the judgment of the District Court, and we deny Bell s motion for appointment of counsel. ______________________________ -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.
