Case Summary
**Case Summary: Michelle Hurter v. Michael Astrue**
**Docket Number:** 7844878
**Court:** [Specify the court if known, e.g., United States District Court]
**Date:** [Specify the date if known]
**Parties:**
- **Plaintiff:** Michelle Hurter
- **Defendant:** Michael Astrue, Commissioner of Social Security
**Background:**
The case of Michelle Hurter v. Michael Astrue involves a review of a decision made by the Social Security Administration (SSA) regarding the denial of Michelle Hurter's application for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits. The plaintiff, Michelle Hurter, contends that she is disabled due to various medical conditions and is seeking judicial review of the SSA's decision which denied her claims.
**Facts:**
- Michelle Hurter filed for SSDI benefits, claiming that her medical conditions severely limited her ability to perform substantial gainful activity.
- The SSA conducted a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), who ultimately ruled against Hurter, finding that she did not meet the criteria for disability as defined by the Social Security Act.
- Hurter appealed the ALJ’s decision, arguing that the ALJ erred in evaluating her medical evidence and in assessing her credibility.
**Issues:**
1. Did the ALJ fail to properly evaluate the medical evidence presented by Hurter, including opinions from treating physicians?
2. Did the ALJ make appropriate findings regarding Hurter's residual functional capacity (RFC)?
3. Was the ALJ's determination that Hurter could perform work available in the national economy supported by substantial evidence?
**Holding:**
[This would typically state the court's decision, however, without specific details, we cannot provide the outcome. If known, insert the court's ruling.]
**Conclusion:**
The ruling on this case would have implications for the treatment of disability claims and the standard of review applied in social security cases. This summary serves as an overview of the key elements within the case and the legal issues at play. Further details would be necessary for a comprehensive understanding of the case’s resolution and its impact on future disability claims.
[Note: Details like the court's ruling, complex legal arguments, and implications of the decision are crucial for a full case summary but would require specific case outcomes and judicial opinions that may not be available in this instance.]