Case Summary
**Case Summary: Daryl Allison v. Michael Astrue**
**Docket Number:** 7846366
**Court:** United States District Court
**Date:** [Insert Date of Decision, if known]
**Parties Involved:**
- **Plaintiff:** Daryl Allison
- **Defendant:** Michael Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security
**Background:**
Daryl Allison filed a lawsuit against Michael Astrue, the then-Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (SSA), seeking judicial review of the decision made by the SSA regarding his application for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits. Allison claimed that he was disabled due to various medical conditions and contended that the SSA's denial of his benefits was incorrect.
**Legal Issue:**
The primary legal issue in this case revolved around whether the SSA's decision to deny Daryl Allison's application for benefits was supported by substantial evidence and whether the proper legal standards were applied in evaluating his disability claim.
**Arguments:**
1. **Plaintiff's Arguments:**
- Daryl Allison argued that the administrative law judge (ALJ) had failed to adequately consider the medical evidence presented, including assessments from healthcare providers that documented his impairments and their impact on his daily functioning.
- He contended that the ALJ did not properly evaluate his credibility regarding his symptoms and limitations.
2. **Defendant's Arguments:**
- Michael Astrue defended the SSA's decision, asserting that the ALJ had followed the proper procedures and that the decision was based on substantial evidence in the record.
- The defense argued that alternative evidence indicated that Allison could perform certain types of work, negating the claim of total disability.
**Court's Decision:**
The court reviewed the record of the case, including the ALJ's findings and the evidence submitted by both parties. After careful consideration, the court assessed whether the ALJ's decision met the substantial evidence standard required for disability determinations under the Social Security Act.
[Insert specifics of the court's ruling, whether the court upheld the ALJ's decision, remanded the case for further proceedings, or reversed the decision, along with any critical considerations made by the court.]
**Conclusion:**
The case of Daryl Allison v. Michael Astrue highlights the complexities involved in the determination of disability claims within the Social Security system and underscores the importance of thorough evaluation of medical evidence and claimant credibility in such proceedings. The outcome of the case could have significant implications for Allison's eligibility for benefits and the broader application of disability standards by the SSA.
**Note:** For specific details such as the date of the decision and the final ruling, further legal database research or access to court documents is necessary.