SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Stephen C. Fulton

Last decided BostonSep 2022
Decisions 1,977since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same timeframe to ensure accuracy. The 47% approval rate for Stephen C. Fulton reflects all decisions on record since 2016, which can be measured against the 37% to 75% range of other judges whose most recent office on record is Boston. These figures are derived from a volume of 1,977 decisions, providing a view of past activity. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 47%
Decisions on record 1,977

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Fulton. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 30, 2022. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

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

Judge Fulton
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY22
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 Stephen C. Fulton remained steady between 2016 and 2019, hovering near 48%. Following this period, the data shows a decline, with the final recorded year of 2022 showing a 37% approval rate across 110 decisions. This shift in the later portion of the record suggests a change in the outcomes of cases decided during that window. Understanding this trend helps you prepare for the specific evidentiary requirements of your hearing.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Fulton'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 Boston hearing office

Stephen C. Fulton's most recent SSA record (September 2022) is at the Boston hearing office. This office serves you throughout the region and maintains a bench of 15 judges whose most recent office on record is this location. You can expect a formal process where the quality of your medical documentation is the primary factor in the decision. You can see the Boston hearing office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Boston

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 15 judges whose most recent office on record is Boston, and their approval rates vary significantly, ranging from 37% to 75% on their since-2016 records. Because this variation exists across the bench, it is important to focus on the strength of your own medical evidence. 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