Where an application for supplemental security income was denied by the Social Security Administration, that decision should be upheld because the plaintiff's income exceeded the statutory limit.
"...On Saturday 14, 2012 (plaintiff Jimmy Lee) king filed an application for SSI benefits, alleging disability due to affective disorder, anxiety-related disorder and alcohol abuse in sustained remission...
"On June 11, 2014, SSA issued a notice to King stating that he was owed $14,940 in back payments for the time period between October 2012 and June 2014....The next day, June 12, 2014, the SSA retracted the aforementioned notice and stated that King was instead owed $595 in back payments for the period from December 1, 2013 through April 30, 2014. SSA also stated that King was ineligible for SSI benefits from October 1, 2012 to November 30, 2013 and from May 1, 2014 forward. Id. Specifically, SSA noted that King's excess resources originated from the following sources: approximately $50,000 in 'other' income in 2013, and worker's compensation proceeds in 2012. On June 26, 2014 ....SSA sent a third notice to King stating that his resources exceeded the statuory SSI limit between November 2013 through April 2014 and, as a result, he was ineligible for SSI benefits from December 1,2013 through April 2014...
"On April 28, 2017, the ALJ affirmed SSA's dcision denying SSI benefits because King's resources exceeded the statutory countable resources limit for SSI recipients and he did not produce sufficient evidence to rebutt this conclusion....
"King alleges that the ALJ failed to consider proffered evidence and testimony in concluding that King exceeded the statutory resource limit...
"King failed to account for at least $30,000 in cash withdrawals...
"Other courts have upheld SSI ineligibility dterminations where the claimant failed to account for the spend-down of excess cash...King has similarly failed to produce corroborating evidence of his spend-down and has not, therefore, met his burden under 20 C.E.R.sequence 416.200.
"The Court concludes here that the ALJ did not ignore documentary and testimonal evidence. Rather, the record before the ALJ indicates that King's income exceeded the statutory limit and he failed to proffer sufficient documentation of his spending, including by failing to account for nearly $30,000 in cash withdrawals. Accordingly, King failed to provide evidence that he satisfied the financial requirements for SSI eligibility and, as a result, the ALJ did not err in affirming the denial of SSI benefits..
"For the aforementioned reasons, the Court allows Commissioner's motion to affirm, D. 14, and denies King's motion to reverse and remand, D. 11."
.
