SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Lori Imsland

Last decided St LouisJul 2026
Decisions 3,653since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at consistent timeframes. While the overall approval rate since 2016 is 48%, recent performance can vary. We look at the latest reporting period to see how the judge compares to the St Louis office, Missouri state, and national averages. With 3,653 decisions on record, the data provides a view of past patterns. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 48%
Decisions on record 3,653
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Imsland St Louis National
Approval rate 48% 51% 58%
Fully favorable 40% — —
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 Imsland's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Imsland
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 approval rate for Lori Imsland has fluctuated between 44% and 53%. The record includes 3,653 total decisions, providing a view of how these patterns have evolved. While the latest period shows an approval rate of 48%, this follows a year of higher activity in 2025. The recent data reflects a continuation of this pattern, though your case outcome depends on the specific evidence you present.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Imsland'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 St Louis hearing office

Lori Imsland's most recent office on record is the St Louis hearing office, which serves claimants across Missouri. This office is part of a broader regional network, and the bench includes 20 judges whose most recent office on record is this location. You can expect a standard hearing process focused on your medical and vocational evidence.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is St Louis

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 20 judges whose most recent office on record is the St Louis office. Approval rates among this bench range from 30% to 78% based 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