SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Monica J. Anderson

Last decided New OrleansJul 2026
Decisions 3,105since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at the same timeframes to ensure accuracy. While your judge's since-2016 approval rate of 47% provides a long-term view, her latest-period approval rate is 44%. This latest figure sits 5 percentage points below the New Orleans office average of 49%. These statistics are derived from a significant docket of 3,105 decisions on record since 2016. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 47%
Decisions on record 3,105
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Anderson New Orleans National
Approval rate 44% 49% 58%
Fully favorable 31% — —
Denials 56% — —

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

Judge Anderson
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY26
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 2016, your judge's approval rate has shown a varied trend. After starting at 37% in 2016, the rate fluctuated before reaching a peak of 52% in 2025. The most recent data from 2026 shows a rate of 44% for the partial year. The consistent volume of decisions allows for a stable view of these patterns over time.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Anderson'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 New Orleans hearing office

Monica J. Anderson's most recent office on record is the New Orleans hearing office, with decisions there through July 2026. This office serves claimants across Louisiana. With 17 judges on the bench, the office maintains an office-wide latest-period approval rate of 49%. You can expect a standard hearing process where the focus remains on the medical and vocational evidence you present.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is New Orleans

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 17 judges whose most recent office on record is the New Orleans hearing office, with 6 of them having decided cases in the latest SSA file. Approval rates among this bench range from 38% to 85% on their since-2016 records. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

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