Legal Case Summary

Amanda Zettelmier v. Michael Astrue


Date Argued: Fri Jun 11 2010
Case Number: 09-35848
Docket Number: 7847507
Judges:Benitez, Callahan, Ikuta
Duration: 21 minutes
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Case Summary

**Case Summary: Amanda Zettelmier v. Michael Astrue** **Docket Number:** 7847507 **Court:** United States District Court **Date:** [Insert Date] **Parties Involved:** - Plaintiff: Amanda Zettelmier - Defendant: Michael Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security **Background:** Amanda Zettelmier filed a case against Michael Astrue, who was the Commissioner of Social Security at the time of the lawsuit. The case centers around Zettelmier's application for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits, which was denied by the Social Security Administration (SSA). **Facts of the Case:** Zettelmier alleged that due to severe medical conditions, she was unable to work and therefore qualified for SSDI benefits. After her initial application was denied, she requested a hearing before an administrative law judge (ALJ). The ALJ's decision was unfavorable, concluding that Zettelmier was not disabled as per the criteria set forth by the SSA. **Claims:** Zettelmier argued that the ALJ had erred in making her determination by not properly considering the medical evidence and the impact of her disabilities on her capacity to work. She contended that the ALJ's findings were not supported by substantial evidence and did not adhere to the proper legal standards when evaluating her claim. **Legal Arguments:** The plaintiff asserted that the ALJ failed to give appropriate weight to the opinions of her treating physicians and disregarded crucial evidence that supported her claim for disability. Additionally, Zettelmier contended that the ALJ did not adequately consider her subjective complaints regarding her limitations. **Court's Decision:** The United States District Court reviewed the record, including the ALJ's decision and the medical records provided. The Court considered whether the ALJ's findings were supported by substantial evidence and whether the legal standards were correctly applied. The outcome of the case (whether affirmed, reversed, or remanded) would depend on the Court's assessment of these issues. No details regarding the final judgment are provided in this summary. **Significance:** This case highlights the judicial review process for Social Security disability determinations and underscores the importance of thorough consideration of medical evidence and subjective experiences by ALJs. The decision may have implications for how disability claims are adjudicated and the standards required for evidence evaluation. **Conclusion:** The ruling in Amanda Zettelmier v. Michael Astrue serves to clarify the standards for disability determination and the responsibilities of the Social Security Administration in reviewing claims. Further developments in the case would provide details on the specific findings and impact on Zettelmier's eligibility for benefits.

Amanda Zettelmier v. Michael Astrue


Oral Audio Transcript(Beta version)

no audio transcript available