Court Opinion

ID: 9388297
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-20 16:00:48.291129+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:19.590152
License: Public Domain

United States Court of Appeals
                           For the Eighth Circuit
                       ___________________________

                               No. 22-3124
                       ___________________________

                                Vickie Ann Wright

                       lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

                                          v.

    Kilolo Kijakazi, Acting Commissioner of Social Security Administration

                      lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee
                                     ____________

                    Appeal from United States District Court
                      for the Eastern District of Missouri
                                 ____________

                            Submitted: April 11, 2023
                              Filed: April 20, 2023
                                  [Unpublished]
                                 ____________

Before GRUENDER, SHEPHERD, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges.
                        ____________

PER CURIAM.

      Vickie Wright appeals an order affirming the denial of disability insurance
benefits and supplemental security income. We agree substantial evidence in the
record as a whole supports the adverse decision and affirm.1 See Kraus v. Saul, 988
F.3d 1019, 1023-24 (8th Cir. 2021) (standard of review).

       Specifically, we find the administrative law judge (ALJ) properly discounted
Wright’s subjective complaints, and substantial evidence supported the ALJ’s
residual functional capacity (RFC) determination. See Whitman v. Colvin, 762 F.3d
701, 706 (8th Cir. 2014) (concluding ALJ properly considered claimant’s lack of
medical care in considering his allegations of debilitating symptoms); Krogmeier v.
Barnhart, 294 F.3d 1019, 1024 (8th Cir. 2002) (concluding substantial evidence
supported RFC determination based on medical records, medical opinions, and some
aspects of claimant’s testimony). We find the ALJ did not err in proceeding with
Wright’s hearing despite her pro se status, as Wright received written notice of her
right to representation and a list of organizations to contact regarding representation,
and as she acknowledged and waived the right to representation at the hearing. See
Wingert v. Bowen, 894 F.2d 296, 298 (8th Cir. 1990) (noting notice of hearing, which
explained right to counsel, and claimant’s reply indicating he wished to proceed
without counsel showed he was properly advised of and knowingly waived right).
Finally, we find no merit to Wright’s contention that the district court was biased
against her. See Liteky v. United States, 510 U.S. 540, 555 (1994) (noting “judicial
rulings alone almost never constitute valid basis for a bias” finding).

      The judgment is affirmed.
                     ______________________________

      1
       The Honorable Abbie Crites-Leoni, United States Magistrate Judge for the
Eastern District of Missouri, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by
consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

                                          -2-