Rutledge

Rutledge v. Berryhill

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaDecember 27, 20193:18-cv-06601California7,177 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 DARRYLE JEAN RUTLEDGE, Case No. 18-cv-06601-JSC

Plaintiff,

CROSS MOTIONS FOR

v. SUMMARY JUDGMENT

NANCY A. BERRYHILL, Re: Dkt. Nos. 21, 22 Defendant.

Plaintiff Darryle Jean Rutledge seeks social security benefits for a variety of physical and mental impairments, including impairments stemming from a stroke in 2005 and a heart attack in 2006. (Administrative Record (“AR”) 119.) Pursuant to 42 U.S.C § 405(g), Plaintiff filed this lawsuit for judicial review of the final decision by the Commissioner of Social Security (“Commissioner”) denying her benefits claim. Now before the Court are Plaintiff’s and Defendant’s Motions for Summary Judgment. (Dkt. Nos. 21 & 22.) Because the decision of the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) to deny benefits is supported by substantial evidence and otherwise free of legal error, the Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion and GRANTS Defendant’s cross-motion. LEGAL STANDARD …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.