Brandie Hall has a lifetime approval rate of 55% across 15,219 lifetime decisions. While this sits below the national average of 58%, recent trends show a shift, with a 71% approval rate in the latest reporting period. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for the specific requirements of Brandie Hall's courtroom.
This page presents publicly available SSA Office of Hearings Operations disposition data, with no editorial rating or evaluation. ALJs are independent decisionmakers; aggregate statistics describe past patterns, not predictions of how any individual case will be decided. Information here is provided for hearing preparation, not as legal advice.
Approval rates
Comparing a judge's lifetime approval rate to recent office and national benchmarks provides context for your upcoming hearing. Judge Hall maintains a lifetime approval rate of 55%, while the most recent reporting period shows a 71% approval rate. This data is derived from 15,219 lifetime decisions. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.
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 Hall's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.
Decision pattern
Over a 10-year tenure, Judge Hall's decision pattern has shifted. After a period of stability between 2018 and 2022, where approval rates hovered near 50%, the data shows an upward trend starting in 2023. The most recent period reflects a continuation of this pattern, with approval rates reaching 74% in 2025. This recent shift provides insight into the current trends within the courtroom.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Hall'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 Hall? See if a free benefits review fits your case.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Louisville hearing office
The Louisville Hearing Office serves you throughout Kentucky and surrounding areas. This office manages a high volume of cases with a bench of 6 judges, maintaining an office-wide latest approval rate of 54%. You can expect a professional environment where medical documentation is the primary focus of the hearing. You can visit the Louisville Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. Across the Louisville bench, lifetime approval rates for judges range from 45% to 57%. Because you cannot choose your judge, focusing on the quality of your medical evidence remains the most effective way to prepare for your hearing.
Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer
SSDI hearing approval rates — represented vs. on your own
Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.
