SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Michael D. Mance

Last decided Topeka KSSep 2022
Decisions 2,254since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

The approval rate for Michael D. Mance is 42% based on 2,254 decisions on record since 2016. This figure sits within the 24% to 60% range observed among the 9 judges whose most recent office on record is the Topeka KS Hearing Office. These statistics are derived from a significant volume of cases, providing a look at past decision-making trends. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 42%
Decisions on record 2,254

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Mance. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 30, 2022. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

Year-over-year approval rate across Judge Mance's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Mance
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY22
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, Michael D. Mance has maintained a steady approval pattern. While the annual rate fluctuated between a low of 40% and a high of 48% during the 2016 to 2022 period, the overall trend shows consistency. With 2,254 total decisions on record, the data reflects a stable approach to evaluating your disability claim. The latest period on record shows a move toward 44% in 2022, suggesting a continuation of established decision-making habits.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Mance'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 Topeka KS hearing office

The Topeka KS Hearing Office serves you and other claimants across Kansas and the surrounding region. It is home to 9 judges whose most recent office on record is this location. You can expect a standard administrative hearing process focused on your medical evidence and vocational testimony. You can see the Topeka KS Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Topeka KS

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. At the Topeka KS Hearing Office, there are 9 judges whose most recent office on record is this location. Approval rates across this bench vary, ranging from 24% to 60% based on their individual 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