SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Monica L. Flynn

Last decided NorfolkJul 2026
Decisions 1,992since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same timeframe. While your judge's 52% approval rate on record since 2016 provides a long-term view, recent performance shows a 61% approval rate in the latest reporting period. This latest figure sits 6 points above the Norfolk office average of 55%. These statistics are based on a significant volume of decisions, providing a reliable basis for understanding historical patterns.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 52%
Decisions on record 1,992
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Flynn Norfolk National
Approval rate 61% 55% 58%
Fully favorable 54% — —
Denials 39% — —

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

Judge Flynn
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY17FY26
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, the approval rate for Monica L. Flynn has shown fluctuations, moving from 72% in 2017 to 47% in 2018, 46% in 2019, 51% in 2020, 45% in 2021, 56% in 2022, 55% in 2023, 62% in 2024, 50% in 2025, and 61% in 2026. With 1,992 total decisions on record, the data reveals a judge whose recent output reflects a shift from the mid-range performance seen in previous years.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Flynn'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 Norfolk hearing office

Monica L. Flynn's most recent office on record is the Norfolk hearing office, which serves claimants across Virginia. This office is part of a regional network that handles a high volume of disability claims, with a bench of 12 judges whose most recent office on record is this location. The office-wide approval rate in the latest period was 55%.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Norfolk

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 12 judges whose most recent office on record is the Norfolk office. Approval rates for this bench range from 48% to 60% on their records since 2016. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

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