Michael Hellman is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Orland Park Hearing Office. Over his 10 years on the bench, 45% of his 19,141 lifetime decisions have been approvals. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for this judge's specific bench.
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
Judge Hellman maintains a lifetime approval rate of 45% across 19,141 lifetime decisions. In the most recent reporting period, your approval rate was 33%, which sits 13 percentage points below the national average of 58%. This data provides a statistical baseline for understanding his courtroom history. You can find more information on the Orland Park Hearing Office page.
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 Hellman'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 his 10-year tenure, Judge Hellman has seen his approval rates fluctuate. After a period of higher approvals peaking at 59% in 2020, the rate has trended to 33% in the most recent reporting period. This shift reflects a move away from his historical lifetime average. These patterns are common in the Social Security Administration hearing process and often correlate with changes in case complexity or evidence standards.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Hellman'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 Hellman? See if a free benefits review fits your case.
Check My BenefitsAbout the Orland Park hearing office
The Orland Park Hearing Office serves a significant population in Illinois, managing a high volume of disability claims with a bench of 6 judges. The office currently maintains an approval rate that reflects the broader regional trends in the Midwest. You should be prepared for a thorough review of your medical documentation. You can see the Orland Park Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. Across the Orland Park bench, lifetime approval rates for judges range from 33% to 63%. Because of this variance, understanding the local office environment is a standard part of your case preparation.
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.
