SSDI Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Michael Friedman

SSDI Administrative Law Judge at the New York Hearing Office · 4 years on the bench · 8,624 lifetime decisions

Hearing scheduled with Judge Friedman?

Free Benefits Review →
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Judge Friedman has maintained a 50% lifetime approval rate over 8,624 decisions. In the most recent reporting period, his approval rate trailed the New York Hearing Office average by 10 percentage points and the national average by 8 percentage points. These figures reflect a significant volume of cases, providing a stable look at his historical decision-making. Aggregate rates describe past decisions rather than predicting outcomes for individual hearings.

Metric Judge Friedman New York National
Approval rate 50% 60% 58%
Fully favorable 43%
Denials 50%

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

Judge Friedman
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY19
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

Decision pattern

Over his 4 years on the bench, your judge's approval rate has shown an upward trend. Starting at 37% in 2016, the rate climbed to 57% by 2019. This pattern suggests a shift in his approach or the types of cases presented in his courtroom over time. The recent period reflects a continuation of this steady growth in allowance rates.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Friedman'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 with Judge Friedman? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.

Free Benefits Review
Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the New York hearing office

The New York Hearing Office serves a large population, managing a high volume of disability claims. With a bench of 6 judges, the office maintains an average approval rate of 60%. You should be prepared for a rigorous review of your medical documentation and vocational history when appearing at this office.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. Within the New York Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the 6 judges range from 37% to 82%. This variance highlights why understanding the local judicial environment is useful. For preparation purposes, the guidance remains consistent regardless of which judge you are assigned.

Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer

SSDI hearing approval rates — represented vs. on your own

WITHOUT A LAWYER
baseline approval rate
Unrepresented claimants
WITH A LAWYER
~3×
higher approval rate
Represented claimants
Free Benefits Review

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