U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 2013

The court reversed summary judgment on Burgess’s Fourth Amendment excessive-force claim and several related Ohio tort claims because, under Burgess’s version of events, the force could have been unreasonable and material factual disputes remained.

The court reversed and remanded because the ALJ did not give sufficiently specific, evidence-supported reasons for discounting the treating psychiatrist’s opinions and did not adequately evaluate other relevant treatment evidence under the agency’s regulations.