SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. George M. Akins

Last decided MontgomeryJul 2026
Decisions 622since 2023

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at consistent timeframes. While George M. Akins maintains a 64% approval rate across his 622 decisions on record since September 2023, his latest-period approval rate of 74% reflects more recent activity. This latest-period figure sits 3 points above the Montgomery office average of 71%, 12 points above the Alabama state average of 62%, and 16 points above the national average of 58%. These figures represent historical trends rather than individual case outcomes.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2023
Approval rate 64%
Decisions on record 622
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Akins Montgomery National
Approval rate 74% 71% 58%
Fully favorable 70% — —
Denials 26% — —

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 Akins's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Akins
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY24FY26
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate (SSA's term: allowance rate) = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total decisions, which exclude dismissals.

Decision pattern

Since September 2023, the approval trend for George M. Akins has shown movement. After an approval rate of 65% in 2024 and 60% in 2025, the 2026 fiscal year-to-date period shows an approval rate of 74% over 98 decisions. The total of 622 decisions on record provides a view of how this judge has approached disability claims over the last few years.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Akins'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 scheduled?

Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Montgomery hearing office

The Montgomery hearing office serves you and other claimants throughout Alabama and the surrounding region. As of the most recent office on record in July 2026, the office bench consisted of 17 judges. You can expect a standard hearing process where the quality of medical evidence remains the primary factor in the outcome.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Montgomery

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you draw is essentially random. There are 17 judges whose most recent office on record is the Montgomery hearing office, and 9 of them decided cases here in the latest file through July 2026. Approval rates for this bench range from 21% to 92% on their respective records.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
1×
baseline approval rate
Unrepresented claimants
WITH A LAWYER
~3×
higher approval rate
Represented claimants

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