All SSA Administrative Law Judges — Approval Rates and Decision Counts

Unable to work?

Free 2 minutes Confidential

Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
baseline allowance rate
Unrepresented claimants
WITH A LAWYER
~3×
higher allowance rate
Represented claimants

Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37 — analysis of SSA ALJ adult disability decisions, FY 2007–2015. Claimants with a representative were allowed benefits at a rate nearly three times higher than those without. Individual case outcomes vary based on medical evidence, the specific judge, and quality of representation.

Every SSA Administrative Law Judge, Ranked

ALJs ranked by lifetime approval rate and performance score.

Showing 100 of 2020 judges
Office
Approval Rate
93%
Decisions
15,443
Approval Rate
93%
Decisions
8,642
Approval Rate
95%
Decisions
7,119
Office
Approval Rate
91%
Decisions
1,619
Approval Rate
91%
Decisions
8,350
Office
TAMPA
Approval Rate
91%
Decisions
22,591
Approval Rate
90%
Decisions
3,475
Approval Rate
90%
Decisions
9,403
Office
Approval Rate
89%
Decisions
11,732
Office
Approval Rate
89%
Decisions
2,554
Approval Rate
89%
Decisions
8,894
Approval Rate
89%
Decisions
18,933
Approval Rate
88%
Decisions
29,079
Approval Rate
88%
Decisions
1,088
Approval Rate
87%
Decisions
2,692
Approval Rate
87%
Decisions
15,648
Approval Rate
87%
Decisions
10,689
Office
Approval Rate
87%
Decisions
10,067
Approval Rate
87%
Decisions
9,673
Approval Rate
87%
Decisions
1,627
Approval Rate
87%
Decisions
8,359
Approval Rate
86%
Decisions
9,884
Approval Rate
86%
Decisions
1,937
Approval Rate
86%
Decisions
12,509
Approval Rate
86%
Decisions
17,277
Office
Approval Rate
86%
Decisions
13,426
Approval Rate
85%
Decisions
5,076
Approval Rate
85%
Decisions
2,301
Office
CREVE COEUR
Approval Rate
84%
Decisions
2,049
Office
Approval Rate
84%
Decisions
13,360
Approval Rate
84%
Decisions
16,109
Office
TAMPA
Approval Rate
84%
Decisions
21,478
Approval Rate
84%
Decisions
19,793
Office
Approval Rate
84%
Decisions
1,305
Approval Rate
84%
Decisions
2,493
Office
Approval Rate
84%
Decisions
2,722
Office
Approval Rate
84%
Decisions
27,643
Approval Rate
84%
Decisions
4,788
Approval Rate
83%
Decisions
5,474
Approval Rate
83%
Decisions
7,321
Office
WHITE PLAINS
Approval Rate
83%
Decisions
10,127
Approval Rate
83%
Decisions
13,099
Office
Approval Rate
83%
Decisions
13,899
Office
Approval Rate
83%
Decisions
23,366
Approval Rate
83%
Decisions
14,999
Office
MIAMI
Approval Rate
83%
Decisions
1,168
Approval Rate
83%
Decisions
24,196
Approval Rate
83%
Decisions
1,987
Office
Approval Rate
83%
Decisions
21,513
Approval Rate
82%
Decisions
6,970
Office
Approval Rate
82%
Decisions
15,876
Office
Approval Rate
82%
Decisions
7,155
Office
Approval Rate
82%
Decisions
24,301
Approval Rate
82%
Decisions
5,673
Approval Rate
82%
Decisions
18,824
Approval Rate
82%
Decisions
8,706
Approval Rate
82%
Decisions
19,142
Office
Approval Rate
82%
Decisions
7,934
Office
Approval Rate
82%
Decisions
27,320
Office
Approval Rate
82%
Decisions
18,472
Office
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
24,470
Office
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
2,822
Office
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
23,787
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
5,785
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
6,030
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
25,862
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
14,352
Office
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
17,649
Office
TULSA
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
14,198
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
26,518
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
24,093
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
21,332
Office
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
21,431
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
22,450
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
16,609
Office
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
2,533
Office
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
684
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
8,220
Approval Rate
81%
Decisions
9,987
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
22,246
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
14,029
Office
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
2,955
Office
TULSA
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
29,715
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
11,060
Office
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
20,026
Office
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
29,908
Office
DALLAS NORTH
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
34,005
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
12,563
Office
CREVE COEUR
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
1,177
Office
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
21,063
Office
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
7,120
Office
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
20,552
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
6,348
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
12,914
Office
CREVE COEUR
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
6,047
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
15,540
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
7,473
Office
Approval Rate
80%
Decisions
18,868
Approval Rate
79%
Decisions
4,861
Office
Approval Rate
79%
Decisions
9,065
Rank Judge Office Approval Rate Decisions
1Michael C. Blanton SEATTLE, WA 93%15,443
2Louis G. McAfoos III SOUTH JERSEY, NJ 93%8,642
3Ollie Garmon ATLANTA NORTH, GA 95%7,119
4Stanley Petraschuk DOVER, DE 91%1,619
5Edwin E. Kerstine JACKSON MS, MS 91%8,350
6Paul L. Johnston TAMPA 91%22,591
7Sara L. Alston NHC BALTIMORE, MD 90%3,475
8E. Norman Graham GREENSBORO, NC 90%9,403
9Barry C. LaBoda ORLANDO, FL 89%11,732
10Stanley A. Moskal Jr. BUFFALO, NY 89%2,554
11Melinda McIntyre COVINGTON GA, GA 89%8,894
12James A. Burke ALBUQUERQUE, NM 89%18,933
13Charles Walters DALLAS NORTH OHO, TX 88%29,079
14Mary Chrzanowski FT LAUDERDALE, FL 88%1,088
15Maria L. Spitz GREENSBORO, NC 87%2,692
16Matthew Malfa MANCHESTER, NH 87%15,648
17Douglas G. White KINGSPORT, TN 87%10,689
18Manuel del Valle SAN JUAN, PR 87%10,067
19Charles Bridges HARRISBURG, PA 87%9,673
20Steven C. Smith GRAND RAPIDS, MI 87%1,627
21James H. Scott CHARLESTON SC, SC 87%8,359
22Laurel J. Greene ST PETERSBURG FL, FL 86%9,884
23Larry A. Auerbach ATLANTA NORTH, GA 86%1,937
24Trace Baldwin OKLAHOMA CITY, OK 86%12,509
25Glenn M. Embree ATLANTA DOWNTOWN, GA 86%17,277
26John M. Lischak SYRACUSE, NY 86%13,426
27M. Thayne Warner SALT LAKE CITY, UT 85%5,076
28Joseph Shortill PORTLAND ME, ME 85%2,301
29W. Gary Jewell CREVE COEUR 84%2,049
30Major Williams Jr. OAKLAND, CA 84%13,360
31Ronald L. Waldman LONG ISLAND, NY 84%16,109
32Daniel A. Piloseno Jr. TAMPA 84%21,478
33Kerry J. Anzalone NEW ORLEANS, LA 84%19,793
34Sean P. Walsh BRONX, NY 84%1,305
35Edward S. Zanaty BIRMINGHAM, AL 84%2,493
36Emily Cameron Shattil OMAHA, NE 84%2,722
37Jan Leventer QUEENS, NY 84%27,643
38Richard P. McCully ATLANTA NORTH, GA 84%4,788
39Dennis R. Kramer VALPARAISO IN, IN 83%5,474
40Bernadette Freeman OAK BROOK, IL 83%7,321
41John J. Barry WHITE PLAINS 83%10,127
42Leroy C. Bryant NHC BALTIMORE, MD 83%13,099
43Sanya Hill-Maxion STOCKTON, CA 83%13,899
44Ronald Herman OAK PARK, IL 83%23,366
45John D. McNamee-Alemany ST PETERSBURG FL OHO, FL 83%14,999
46Thomas W. Snook MIAMI 83%1,168
47Whitfield Haigler Jr. DALLAS NORTH OHO, TX 83%24,196
48Sharif F. Nesheiwat NEW YORK VARICK, NY 83%1,987
49Yeli Quinones-Regalado SAN JUAN, PR 83%21,513
50John Murdock NHC FALLS CHURCH, VA 82%6,970
51Jacqueline Y. Hall-Keith OAK PARK, IL 82%15,876
52Gary J. Lee HONOLULU, HI 82%7,155
53Margaret L. Pecoraro QUEENS, NY 82%24,301
54S. A. Bryant WASHINGTON, DC 82%5,673
55Brent T. Asseff CHARLOTTE, NC 82%18,824
56Henry Oliver ELKINS PARK, PA 82%8,706
57Henry H. Chambers CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 82%19,142
58Ramon E. Quinones SAN JUAN, PR 82%7,934
59Jeffrey A. Hatfield HONOLULU, HI 82%27,320
60Marissa A. Pizzuto NEW YORK, NY 82%18,472
61Paul F. Kelly ALBANY, NY 81%24,470
62John L. Shailer COLUMBUS, OH 81%2,822
63Bonny S. Barezky CHICAGO, IL 81%23,787
64Ronald L. Burton FORT SMITH, AR 81%5,785
65Steven H. Templin OAK BROOK, IL 81%6,030
66Aubri Masterson SANTA BARBARA, CA 81%25,862
67Joseph R. Faraguna LONG ISLAND, NY 81%14,352
68Moira Ausems EUGENE, OR 81%17,649
69Jeffrey S. Wolfe TULSA 81%14,198
70Brian J. Crawley LONG ISLAND, NY 81%26,518
71Mary Forrest-Doyle BALTIMORE, MD 81%24,093
72William J. Mackowiak OAK BROOK, IL 81%21,332
73Joani Sedaca NEW YORK, NY 81%21,431
74Andrea Addison JERSEY CITY, NJ 81%22,450
75Melinda K. Hart COVINGTON GA, GA 81%16,609
76Larry B. Creson MEMPHIS, TN 81%2,533
77John A. Ransom FLINT, MI 81%684
78James Garrett ELKINS PARK, PA 81%8,220
79Raymond J. Zadzilko JOHNSTOWN, PA 81%9,987
80Michael R. Swan CHATTANOOGA, TN 80%22,246
81Donald R. Colpitts LAS VEGAS, NV 80%14,029
82Joanne E. Adamczyk FLINT, MI 80%2,955
83David W. Engel TULSA 80%29,715
84Gregory O. Varo LEXINGTON, KY 80%11,060
85George W. Jenkins III MEMPHIS, TN 80%20,026
86Dawn M. Gruenburg OAK PARK, IL 80%29,908
87Joseph Liken DALLAS NORTH 80%34,005
88Scott T. Miller ST PETERSBURG FL, FL 80%12,563
89James K. Steitz CREVE COEUR 80%1,177
90Thomas A. Ciccolini AKRON OH, OH 80%21,063
91Millard L. Biloon SAVANNAH, GA 80%7,120
92D. B. Stalley MOBILE, AL 80%20,552
93Robert E. Lowenstein LOS ANGELES DOWNTOWN, CA 80%6,348
94Robert M. Butler NHC ST LOUIS, MO 80%12,914
95Julian Cosentino CREVE COEUR 80%6,047
96Laura G. McHenry ATLANTA DOWNTOWN, GA 80%15,540
97Robert T. Jackson Jr. ATLANTA DOWNTOWN, GA 80%7,473
98George W. Reyes TUCSON, AZ 80%18,868
99Joshua Pinkus SPRINGFIELD MA, MA 79%4,861
100Thomas Grabeel NEW YORK, NY 79%9,065

Data sourced from the U.S. Social Security Administration (SSA) Office of Hearings Operations disposition records. Lifetime allowance rate reflects a judge's full career at SSA across all offices. Performance score is calculated by ClaimsBoost — a composite of allowance rate, caseload, and consistency vs. peers.

What Is an SSA Administrative Law Judge?

Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) at the Social Security Administration's Office of Hearings Operations are the federal officials who decide disability appeals. When your initial SSDI or SSI claim is denied, your appeal is assigned to an ALJ at the hearing office serving your area. That judge independently reviews your medical evidence, holds a hearing where you and your representative can present testimony, questions a vocational expert about jobs you could still perform, and issues a written decision on whether you qualify for benefits.

Each ALJ has their own style, pace, and tendencies. Some weigh objective medical evidence heavily; others give significant weight to claimant testimony about daily activities. Over a career, these differences show up as measurable variation in allowance rates — some judges approve 80%+ of cases while others approve under 30%. Unlike the office you're assigned to, you cannot request a specific judge.

Why Individual Judge Stats Matter

The judge assigned to your case is one of the strongest predictors of the outcome. The same case evidence can produce a favorable decision from one ALJ and a denial from another at the same office. Knowing an individual judge's historical approval rate, fully favorable rate, and typical hearing style lets you and your attorney prepare testimony, line up medical evidence, and anticipate cross-examination in a way tailored to that specific judge.

If you have a hearing scheduled, a free benefits review takes two minutes and can help you understand your options — especially whether representation is worth the contingency fee (capped by SSA at 25% of back pay or $9,200, whichever is less).