SSDI Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Lori S. Grayson

SSDI Administrative Law Judge at the Hattiesburg Hearing Office · 10 years on the bench · 16,994 lifetime decisions

Hearing scheduled with Judge Grayson?

Free Benefits Review →
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Comparing a judge's history against broader benchmarks provides context for your upcoming hearing. Judge Grayson maintains a lifetime approval rate of 41%, which can be measured against the latest Hattiesburg office average of 48% and the national average of 58%. These figures are derived from a significant docket of 16,994 lifetime decisions. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Metric Judge Grayson Hattiesburg National
Approval rate 41% 48% 58%
Fully favorable 36%
Denials 56%

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

Judge Grayson
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY25
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

Decision pattern

Over her 10 years on the bench, Judge Grayson has navigated a varied caseload, with her annual approval rates fluctuating between a low of 35% in 2022 and a high of 54% in 2016. The most recent reporting period shows an approval rate of 44%. This trend reflects her historical approach to evaluating evidence and applying regulatory standards.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

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

Free Benefits Review
Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Hattiesburg hearing office

The Hattiesburg Hearing Office serves a broad population across Mississippi, managing a high volume of disability claims. With a bench of 6 judges, the office operates under standard SSA procedures for administrative hearings. You can expect a formal environment where medical documentation and vocational testimony are prioritized. You can find more information on the Hattiesburg Hearing Office page.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your judge is selected randomly. Within the Hattiesburg Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the 6 judges range from 26% to 63%. This variance highlights why your specific evidentiary presentation remains the most critical factor in your claim.

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