SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Clark S. Cheney

Position Administrative Law Judge
On record SSA records since 2016
Decisions 194 lifetime

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

The approval rate for Clark S. Cheney is based on 194 lifetime decisions recorded between 2016 and 2017. This figure sits at the lower end of the 32% to 79% lifetime approval range observed among the 26 judges on record at the Baltimore office. These statistics provide a broad view of historical decision-making patterns within the office, though they do not predict the outcome of your specific hearing.

Lifetime SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 32%
Decisions on record 194

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Cheney. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 29, 2017. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

Year-over-year approval rate across Judge Cheney's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Cheney
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY17
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

The record for Clark S. Cheney spans from 2016 to 2017, covering 194 total decisions. During this window, your approval rate moved from 37% in 2016 to 30% in 2017. This trend shows a slight decline over the available data period. While these patterns offer insight into past activity, they do not dictate the outcome of your specific case, which depends heavily on the medical evidence and documentation you provide.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Cheney'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 Baltimore hearing office

The Baltimore hearing office serves you and other claimants throughout the region, maintaining a bench of 26 judges on record. The office-wide latest-period approval rate is 60%, reflecting the local environment for disability claims. You can expect a formal process focused on the specific medical and vocational evidence presented in your file. You can see the Baltimore Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 26 judges on record at this office since 2016, 10 of whom are reported in the latest SSA period. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 32% to 79% over their respective lifetime 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
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