Michelle K. Lindsay is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Albuquerque Hearing Office with a lifetime approval rate of 54%. Over her 10 years on the bench, she has presided over 19,169 lifetime decisions. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for your specific case.
This page presents publicly available SSA Office of Hearings Operations disposition data, with no editorial rating or evaluation. ALJs are independent decisionmakers; aggregate statistics describe past patterns, not predictions of how any individual case will be decided. Information here is provided for hearing preparation, not as legal advice.
Approval rates
Comparing a judge's performance to broader benchmarks provides context for your hearing. Judge Lindsay maintains a 54% lifetime approval rate, which we measure against the Albuquerque Hearing Office latest rate of 55% and the national average of 58%. These figures are derived from a substantial docket of 19,169 lifetime decisions, offering a stable view of her historical decision-making.
Office- and national-level breakdowns of fully favorable vs denial rates aren't currently published by SSA in the per-office disposition data. The judge's own breakdown is the detail we have today.
Approval rate over time
Year-over-year approval rate across Judge Lindsay's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.
Decision pattern
Over her 10 years on the bench, Judge Lindsay has seen fluctuations in her approval patterns. While her early years showed rates as high as 61%, recent periods have seen more variability, with the latest reporting period showing a 51% approval rate. This shift reflects a broader trend observed across her tenure, where annual approval rates have moved between 44% and 61%. The latest data suggests a return toward her long-term average, indicating a stable approach to case evaluation.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Lindsay's bench. Judge-specific preparation guidance requires a corpus of public Appeals Council decisions involving each judge, which we haven't built yet.
- Bring a clean treating-physician record. Longitudinal primary-care or specialist notes spanning the disability period, with consistent symptom documentation, are typically the strongest evidence at hearing. A single month's records usually aren't enough.
- Don't rely on consultative exams alone. If your medical evidence is built primarily around a one-time CE finding, expect detailed questioning. Supplement with treating-source statements where possible.
- Prepare for daily-activity questions. Have honest, specific answers about a typical day. Answers that conflict with the medical record (in either direction) tend to hurt credibility.
- Expect transferable-skills probing. A vocational expert will usually testify about jobs available to someone with your limitations. Your representative should be prepared to cross-examine.
Hearing with Judge Lindsay? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Check My BenefitsAbout the Albuquerque hearing office
The Albuquerque Hearing Office serves a large population across New Mexico, managing a high volume of disability claims. With a bench of 6 judges, the office maintains an environment where case evidence is the primary driver of outcomes. You can expect a professional hearing process focused on the medical and vocational facts of your file.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. Within the Albuquerque Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the bench range from 41% to 61%. Because every judge operates under the same federal regulations, the core requirements for proving your disability remain consistent regardless of who hears your case.
Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer
SSDI hearing approval rates — represented vs. on your own
Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.
