Kimberly Lee v. Commissioner of the SSA, No. 15-2402 (4th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-2402 KIMBERLY LEE, on behalf of KJL, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Orangeburg. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (5:14-cv-01356-JMC) Submitted: April 29, 2016 Decided: May 18, 2016 Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kimberly Lee, Appellant Pro Se. Marshall Prince, II, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Kimberly Lee, on behalf of her minor daughter KJL, appeals the district recommendation court’s and order accepting affirming the supplemental security income (SSI). * and find no reversible error. the magistrate Commissioner’s judge’s denial of We have reviewed the record Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons stated by the district court. Lee v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec. Admin., No. 5:14-cv-01356-JMC (D.S.C. Sept. 28, 2015). facts and materials legal before We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately this and argument court presented would not in the aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED * Although we previously have recognized “that non-attorney parents generally may not litigate the claims of their minor children in federal court,” Myers v. Loudoun Cty. Pub. Sch., 418 F.3d 395, 401 (4th Cir. 2005), we conclude that Lee is authorized to litigate KJL’s claims in the circumstances presented by this appeal from the administrative denial of SSI benefits, see Adams ex rel. D.J.W. v. Astrue, 659 F.3d 1297, 1301 (10th Cir. 2011); Machadio v. Apfel, 276 F.3d 103, 107 (2d Cir. 2002); Harris v. Apfel, 209 F.3d 413, 417 (5th Cir. 2000). 2
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.
