Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01719/USCOURTS-ca8-04-01719-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 

---

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.

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United States Attorney; Attorney * [UNPUBLISHED]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

Appellate Case: 04-1719 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/09/2005 Entry ID: 1865404 
-2-

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.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 04-1719 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/09/2005 Entry ID: 1865404