SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Stacy Gray

Last decided FlorenceJul 2026
Decisions 611since 2023

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at consistent timeframes to ensure accuracy. The 74% approval rate for Stacy Gray covers all decisions on record since 2023, providing a sample size of 611 cases. When compared to the 32% to 76% range of other judges whose most recent office on record is Florence, this figure helps contextualize the judge's history. These aggregate rates describe past decisions rather than predicting the outcome of your specific hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2023
Approval rate 74%
Decisions on record 611
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Gray Florence National
Approval rate 67% 47% 58%
Fully favorable 58% — —
Denials 33% — —

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

Judge Gray
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY24FY26
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 trend for Stacy Gray shows a shift from 88% in 2024 to 67% in the partial 2026 fiscal year. With 611 total decisions on record since 2023, the data reflects a significant volume of activity. While the latest-period approval rate of 67% sits 20 points above the Florence office average of 47%, the recent decline suggests a shift in the pattern of decisions.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Gray'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 Florence hearing office

The most recent office on record for Stacy Gray is the Florence hearing office, with decisions there through July 2026. This office serves claimants across Alabama and is part of a regional network of SSA hearing sites. With 9 judges whose most recent office on record is this location, the office maintains a diverse bench with varying approval patterns.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Florence

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you draw is essentially random. There are 9 judges whose most recent office on record is Florence, and 6 of them decided cases here in the latest file through July 2026. Approval rates across this bench range from 32% to 76% on their respective records since 2016. Your preparation remains 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