SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Lawrence Levey

SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Nhc Baltimore Hearing Office · 10 years on the bench · 15,161 lifetime decisions

Hearing scheduled?

Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Judge Levey's approval rate is calculated from a significant docket of 15,161 lifetime decisions. In the most recent reporting period, his approval rate reached 74%, which stands 12 percentage points above the NHC Baltimore office average and 3 points above the national average. These figures provide a statistical baseline for understanding his approach to disability claims. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Metric Judge Levey Nhc Baltimore National
Approval rate 61% 49% 58%
Fully favorable 70%
Denials 26%

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

Judge Levey
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY25
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

Decision pattern

Over his 10 years on the bench, Judge Levey has seen his approval rates fluctuate, ranging from a low of 49% in 2021 to a high of 73% in 2025. This trend indicates that while his lifetime average remains steady at 61%, his recent decision-making has trended upward compared to the middle years of his tenure. This shift may reflect changes in the complexity of cases or the quality of evidence presented. The recent uptick in approvals suggests a period of increased favorable outcomes for your peers.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Levey'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 Nhc Baltimore hearing office

The NHC Baltimore Hearing Office serves applicants throughout Maryland and the surrounding region. With a bench of 6 judges, this office manages a high volume of cases. The office-wide latest approval rate currently sits at 49%, providing a local context for your upcoming hearing. You can see the NHC Baltimore Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The SSA uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning you cannot choose your judge. At the NHC Baltimore office, the bench includes 6 judges with lifetime approval rates ranging from 46% to 81%. While these rates differ, the core requirements for proving disability remain consistent across the entire office. The guidance for your preparation remains the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

Your odds change dramatically 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