SSDI Administrative Law Judge

Hon. David Kurtz

SSDI Administrative Law Judge at the Flint Hearing Office · 8 years on the bench · 16,091 lifetime decisions

Hearing scheduled with Judge Kurtz?

Free Benefits Review →
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Judge Kurtz maintains a lifetime approval rate of 54%, a figure derived from 16,091 total decisions during his 8-year tenure. When compared to the most recent reporting period, his approval rate sits 3 percentage points lower than the Flint Hearing Office average and 4 points below the national average of 58%. These figures provide a statistical baseline for his courtroom, though they are not predictive of your individual outcome.

Metric Judge Kurtz Flint National
Approval rate 54% 57% 58%
Fully favorable 46%
Denials 46%

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

Judge Kurtz
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY23
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

Decision pattern

Over his 8 years on the bench, Judge Kurtz has seen his approval rates shift, starting at 52% in 2016 and reaching a peak of 61% in 2022 before settling at 56% in 2023. With 16,091 lifetime decisions, his pattern reflects a consistent approach to evaluating disability claims. The recent data suggests a return to his long-term average after a period of higher approval frequency.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Kurtz'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 Kurtz? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.

Free Benefits Review
Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Flint hearing office

The Flint Hearing Office serves a significant population across Michigan, managing a high volume of SSDI claims with a bench of 6 judges. The office currently maintains an approval rate of 57%, reflecting the broader regional trends in disability adjudication. You should be prepared for a formal process centered on medical documentation and vocational testimony.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to Judge Kurtz is essentially random. Across the Flint Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates for the 6 judges on the bench range from 43% to 60%. Because each judge manages their own docket, the specific judge you draw can influence the rhythm of your hearing.

Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer

SSDI hearing approval rates — represented vs. on your own

WITHOUT A LAWYER
baseline approval rate
Unrepresented claimants
WITH A LAWYER
~3×
higher approval rate
Represented claimants
Free Benefits Review

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