SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Holly Hansen

Last decided MetairieJul 2026
Decisions 3,896since 2017

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at the same timeframes. While the overall approval rate on record since 2017 is 51%, recent data shows a 59% approval rate during the latest reporting period. This latest-period figure sits 5 points above the Metairie office average of 54% and 1 point above the national average of 58%. These statistics are derived from a significant volume of decisions, providing a stable basis for analysis.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2017
Approval rate 51%
Decisions on record 3,896
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Hansen Metairie National
Approval rate 59% 54% 58%
Fully favorable 44% — —
Denials 41% — —

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

Judge Hansen
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

The approval rate for Holly Hansen has shown an upward trend since 2017. While the rate hovered in the 43% to 45% range between 2018 and 2020, it has climbed in recent years, reaching 62% in 2025. The latest reporting period shows a 59% approval rate. This recent pattern reflects a shift in decision-making, though your case outcome always depends on the specific medical evidence you present.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Hansen'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 Metairie hearing office

The Metairie Hearing Office serves you if you are in the region and is part of a broader network. With 9 judges whose most recent office on record is this location, the office maintains an office-wide latest-period approval rate of 54%. You can expect a standard hearing process where the focus remains on the medical and vocational evidence supporting your disability claim.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Metairie

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 9 judges whose most recent office on record is the Metairie office. Approval rates for this bench range from 24% to 54% on their records since 2016. 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