SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Monica J. Anderson

Position Administrative Law Judge
On record SSA records since 2016
Decisions 3,105 lifetime

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same period to ensure accuracy. While Monica J. Anderson has a 47% lifetime approval rate, her latest-period rate of 44% sits 5 points below the New Orleans office average of 49%. These figures are drawn from a significant volume of cases, providing a clear view of historical trends. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Lifetime 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 = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

Decision pattern

Since 2016, Monica J. Anderson has presided over 3,105 lifetime decisions. Her yearly approval trend has fluctuated, showing a peak of 52% in 2025 before shifting to 44% in the latest period. This recent movement reflects a slight decline compared to her multi-year average. These patterns help illustrate how the judge has handled shifting caseloads over the last decade, though each hearing remains unique based on the specific medical evidence you present.

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

The New Orleans hearing office serves you throughout the region, operating as a critical hub for disability adjudications in Louisiana. With a bench of 17 judges on record, the office maintains an office-wide latest-period approval rate of 49%. You should expect a formal process focused on the medical documentation supporting your claim. You can see the New Orleans Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to Monica J. Anderson is essentially random. There are 17 judges on record at this office since 2016, 6 of whom reported in the latest period. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 38% to 85% over their respective careers. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
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