Case Summary
**Case Summary: McKee v. Astrue**
**Docket Number:** 7845394
**Court:** United States District Court
**Citation:** Not provided
**Date:** Not specified
**Background:**
The case of McKee v. Astrue involves a plaintiff, McKee, who challenged a decision made by Michael Astrue, the former Commissioner of the Social Security Administration (SSA). The plaintiff sought judicial review of the SSA’s denial of social security disability benefits.
**Facts:**
McKee applied for disability benefits, asserting that he was unable to work due to a disabling condition. His application was initially denied by the SSA, leading to a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ). The ALJ ruled against McKee, determining that he did not meet the criteria for disability as defined under the Social Security Act.
**Legal Issues:**
The legal issues arose regarding the ALJ’s findings and the application of the law. Key questions included whether the ALJ applied the correct legal standards in evaluating McKee's claim, whether the findings were supported by substantial evidence, and if proper procedures were followed throughout the adjudication process.
**Arguments:**
- **Plaintiff’s Arguments:** McKee argued that the ALJ failed to properly consider all medical evidence, overlooked significant limitations attributed to his condition, and did not adequately assess his credibility or the impact of his impairment on daily functioning.
- **Defendant’s Arguments:** Astrue, representing the SSA, contended that the ALJ correctly followed the established legal standards and that the decision was supported by substantial evidence in the record.
**Decision:**
The court’s decision is not specified in the summary. However, in cases like this, the court typically reviews the administrative record to determine if the ALJ’s decision was reasonable and legally sound. Possible outcomes may include affirming the ALJ’s ruling, remanding the case for further proceedings, or reversing the denial of benefits.
**Conclusion:**
McKee v. Astrue represents a significant legal battle concerning social security benefits, highlighting the procedural intricacies of disability claims and the importance of thorough evaluations by the SSA and its administrative judges. The case underscores the role of the judiciary in ensuring fair treatment and adherence to legal standards in administrative decisions.
(Note: Specific details regarding the court's ruling and the timeline are not included, as the actual decision and related dates are not available in the summary.)