Kinsley v. Social Security Administration, Commissioner

Michael Kinsley applied for Social Security Disability Insurance and Supplemental Security Income, alleging disability due to mental and physical impairments. An Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found that while Kinsley suffered from severe impairments, he retained the residual functional capacity to perform light work with certain limitations, and denied benefits. Kinsley appealed to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampshire. On September 14, 2018, the court determined that the ALJ had committed legal errors in evaluating the medical opinion evidence and in assessing the credibility of Kinsley's subjective symptom statements. The court concluded that the resulting residual functional capacity finding was not supported by substantial evidence, and reversed the Commissioner's decision, remanding the case for further administrative proceedings.

The United States District Court reversed the Commissioner's decision denying benefits and remanded the case for a new hearing and further administrative proceedings.

Whether the ALJ properly evaluated the medical opinion evidence and the claimant's subjective symptom statements in determining the residual functional capacity, and whether the denial of disability benefits was supported by substantial evidence.

The decision reinforced the strict evidentiary standards requiring ALJs to properly weigh medical opinions and articulate clear reasons for discounting a claimant's subjective allegations, serving as guidance for similar Social Security disability appeals in the District of New Hampshire.