SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. David J. Begley

On record 3,393 decisions since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing a judge's record requires looking at data from the same timeframe to ensure accuracy. While David J. Begley holds a 42% lifetime approval rate, the Washington office bench features a wide range of outcomes, with lifetime rates spanning from 33% to 85%. In the most recent reporting period, David J. Begley's approval rate was 54%, which sits 9 points below the office-wide latest-period average of 63%. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Lifetime SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 42%
Decisions on record 3,393
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Begley Washington National
Approval rate 54% 63% 58%
Fully favorable 46%
Denials 46%

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

Judge Begley
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, David J. Begley has presided over 3,393 decisions. His yearly approval trends show a period of fluctuation, with rates dipping to 36% in 2021 before trending upward. The latest reporting period shows a 54% approval rate, which indicates a shift from his historical lifetime average. This recent pattern may reflect changes in the types of cases heard or the quality of evidence presented in recent dockets.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Begley'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 Washington hearing office

The Washington hearing office serves you if you are in the District of Columbia region. This office maintains a bench of 19 judges on record, with a latest-period office-wide approval rate of 63%. You can expect a standard administrative process focused on medical and vocational evidence. You can see the Washington 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 the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 19 judges on record at this office since 2016, 14 of whom reported data in the latest period. Because approval rates across the bench vary significantly, understanding the office environment is helpful. 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