SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. F. T. Eckert Jr.

Last decided St Petersburg FLSep 2016
Decisions 336since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same timeframe. The 75% approval rate for F. T. Eckert Jr. reflects all decisions on record since 2016, which can be measured against the 35% to 85% range of other judges whose most recent office on record is the St Petersburg FL location. These figures provide a statistical baseline for understanding how different judges have historically approached disability claims.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 75%
Decisions on record 336

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Eckert Jr.. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 30, 2016. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

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

Judge Eckert Jr.
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16
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 approval rate for F. T. Eckert Jr. is based on 336 decisions on record since 2016. During the 2016 window, the judge maintained an approval rate of 75%. Because this data covers a specific period ending in 2016, it represents a historical snapshot of the judge's activity at the St Petersburg FL office. Your individual case results depend on the specific medical evidence and vocational factors you present.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Eckert Jr.'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 St Petersburg FL hearing office

F. T. Eckert Jr.'s most recent office on record is the St Petersburg FL hearing office, where the judge recorded decisions through September 2016. This office serves you and other claimants across Florida and is part of a region with a diverse bench of 17 judges. You can expect a formal hearing process where your medical documentation and vocational testimony are central to the decision.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is St Petersburg FL

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 St Petersburg FL hearing office, with approval rates ranging from 35% to 85% on their since-2016 records. Because each judge has a unique approach to evaluating evidence, understanding the broader office bench is helpful.

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