SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Gretchen M. Greisler

Last decided AlbanyJul 2026
Decisions 3,263since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Evaluating a judge's approval rate requires looking at the data in context. Judge Greisler's 46% approval rate on record since 2016 sits within the 40% to 81% range observed among the bench at the Albany hearing office. In the most recent reporting period, her 48% approval rate is compared against the office's 61%, the state's 62%, and the national 58% benchmarks. These figures provide a statistical baseline for the office's recent activity.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 46%
Decisions on record 3,263
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Greisler Albany National
Approval rate 48% 61% 58%
Fully favorable 34% — —
Denials 52% — —

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

Judge Greisler
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, Judge Greisler has issued 3,263 decisions. Her approval rate has remained relatively steady, with annual rates ranging from 42% to 57%. The most recent reporting period shows an approval rate of 48%, which is consistent with her long-term average. This pattern suggests a stable approach to case evaluation, where your outcome often depends on the specific medical evidence and vocational factors you present.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Greisler'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 Albany hearing office

Gretchen M. Greisler's most recent office on record is the Albany hearing office, which serves claimants across New York. This office maintains a bench of 15 judges who handle a high volume of disability claims. With an office-wide latest-period approval rate of 61%, you can expect a review of your medical documentation and work history.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Albany

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you draw is essentially random. There are 15 judges whose most recent office on record is the Albany hearing office, and 8 of them decided cases here in the latest file from July 2026. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 40% to 81% since 2016.

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