SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Brian Crockett

Last decided MorgantownJul 2026
Decisions 3,366since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at consistent timeframes. While your since-2016 record provides a broad view of history, the latest-period data offers a snapshot of current trends. In the most recent reporting period, the approval rate was 62%, which sits 2 points above the Morgantown office average of 60%. These figures are based on a significant volume of decisions, providing statistical context for your case.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 55%
Decisions on record 3,366
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Crockett Morgantown National
Approval rate 62% 60% 58%
Fully favorable 49% — —
Denials 38% — —

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

Judge Crockett
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 September 2016, the approval rate for Brian Crockett has shown fluctuations. After a period of growth between 2017 and 2020, the rate saw a temporary decline in 2021 before trending upward again. The latest period reflects a continuation of this pattern, with the approval rate currently outpacing both state and national averages. These shifts often reflect changes in the complexity of cases or the quality of evidence presented in your hearing.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Crockett'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 Morgantown hearing office

Brian Crockett's most recent office on record is the Morgantown hearing office, which serves claimants across West Virginia. This office is part of a regional network tasked with processing disability appeals. With a bench of 10 judges, the office maintains an average approval rate of 60% in the latest reporting period. You can expect a formal hearing process focused on your medical and vocational evidence.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Morgantown

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 10 judges whose most recent office on record is the Morgantown hearing office. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 21% to 67% on their since-2016 records. Your preparation remains consistent regardless of which judge is assigned to your case.

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