Norman v. Astrue, No. 5:2007cv00355 - Document 15 (M.D. Ga. 2008)
Court Description: ORDER affirming decision of Social Security Commissioner. Ordered by Judge Hugh Lawson on 9/29/2008. (nbp)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION ROSE M. NORMAN a/k/a ROSE M.CLARK, Plaintiff Case No. 5:07-CV-355 (HL) VS. MICHAEL ASTRUE, S.S. Commissioner, Defendant ORDER This is a review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security denying the plaintiff's claim for benefits under the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 423. All administrative remedies have been exhausted. Jurisdiction arises under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). On July 7, 2005, plaintiff filed an application for Disability Insurance Benefits and Period of Disability. She alleged disability commencing on June 29, 2000, due to coronary artery disease, sleep apnea, osteoarthritis, right carpal tunnel syndrome, obesity, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and mild neuropathy of the left wrist. The application was denied initially and after further review. This civil action was commenced after the recommendation to deny benefits was adopted as the Commissioner's final decision in this case. LEGAL STANDARDS The court's review of the Commissioner's decision is limited to a determination of whether it is supported by substantial evidence and whether the correct legal standards were applied. Walker v. Bowen, 826 F.2d 996 (11th Cir. 1987). Substantial evidence is defined as more than a scintilla and means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Richardson v. Perales, 402 U.S. 389 (1971).
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
