SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Randall D. Huggins

On record 3,936 decisions since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

The approval rates for Randall D. Huggins reflect a significant body of work, with 3,936 lifetime decisions on record. When compared to the Charlotte office-wide lifetime range of 29% to 83%, his record shows a consistent approach to evaluating disability claims. In the most recent reporting period, his 84% approval rate sits 13 points above the current office average of 71%. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for individual hearings.

Lifetime SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 78%
Decisions on record 3,936
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Huggins Charlotte National
Approval rate 84% 71% 58%
Fully favorable 76%
Denials 16%

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

Judge Huggins
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY26
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, the decision pattern for Randall D. Huggins has shown a notable upward trend in approval rates. While his lifetime average stands at 78%, the data indicates a rise in favorable outcomes in recent years, reaching 92% in 2024 and 91% in 2025 before settling at 84% in the most recent period. This shift suggests that recent case outcomes have been consistently higher than his historical baseline. The latest period reflects a continuation of this steady pattern.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Huggins'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 Charlotte hearing office

The Charlotte hearing office serves you throughout North Carolina and the surrounding region. As part of a busy regional network, the office maintains a bench of 18 judges who manage a high volume of disability claims. The office-wide latest-period approval rate is 71%, which provides a baseline for the local administrative environment.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Charlotte hearing office currently has 18 judges on record since 2016, with 9 judges reporting in the latest SSA data period. Because the SSA uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, you cannot choose your judge, and the assignment is essentially random. The lifetime approval rates across this office's bench vary widely, ranging from 29% to 83%.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
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