SSDI Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Michelle K. Lindsay

SSDI Administrative Law Judge at the Albuquerque Hearing Office · 10 years on the bench · 19,169 lifetime decisions

Check My Benefits →
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

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.

Metric Judge Lindsay Albuquerque National
Approval rate 54% 55% 58%
Fully favorable 41%
Denials 49%

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.

Judge Lindsay
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY25
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

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 Benefits
Free 2 minutes Confidential

About 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

WITHOUT A LAWYER
baseline approval rate
Unrepresented claimants
WITH A LAWYER
~3×
higher approval rate
Represented claimants
Check My Benefits

Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.

Frequently asked questions