Sheila Grind v. Carolyn W. Colvin, No. 13-3760 (8th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Civil case - Social Security. The ALJ's decision denying benefits was supported by substantial evidence and is affirmed. [ August 18, 2014
Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 13-3760 ___________________________ Sheila A. Grind lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant v. Carolyn W. Colvin, Acting Commission of the Social Security Administration lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock ____________ Submitted: August 14, 2014 Filed: August 19, 2014 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Sheila A. Grind appeals the district court s1 order affirming the denial of disability insurance benefits and supplemental security income. Because the administrative law judge s (ALJ s) opinion is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole, we affirm. See Hill v. Colvin, 753 F.3d 798, 800 (8th Cir. 2014) (de novo review). We defer to the ALJ s determination that Grind s subjective complaints were not fully credible, as it was supported by several valid reasons, see Turpin v. Colvin, 750 F.3d 989, 993 (8th Cir. 2014); and we find no merit to Grind s assertion that the ALJ s determination of her residual functional capacity (RFC) did not adequately account for her knee arthritis and obesity. See Myers v. Colvin, 721 F.3d 521, 527 (8th Cir. 2013) (RFC must be determined based on all relevant evidence, including medical records, observations of treating physicians and others, and claimant s own description of her limitations; RFC must be supported by some medical evidence); see also Perks v. Astrue, 687 F.3d 1086, 1092 (8th Cir. 2012) (burden of persuasion to demonstrate RFC and prove disability remains on claimant). The judgment of the district court is affirmed. ______________________________ 1 The Honorable H. David Young, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern 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.
