Donald K. Neely is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Baltimore office, where you will find a 70% lifetime approval rate over 16,574 decisions. This sits above the national latest approval rate of 58%. While these figures provide a helpful look at historical trends, they are not a prediction for your specific hearing. An attorney can help you prepare your case to meet the specific evidentiary standards of this judge.
This page presents publicly available SSA Office of Hearings Operations disposition data, with no editorial rating or evaluation. ALJs are independent decisionmakers; aggregate statistics describe past patterns, not predictions of how any individual case will be decided. Information here is provided for hearing preparation, not as legal advice.
Approval rates
Judge Neely maintains a lifetime approval rate of 70%, which is higher than the 58% national average and the 66% Baltimore office average. This data is drawn from a docket of 16,574 lifetime decisions. Comparing these figures helps you understand the local landscape of your disability claim. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.
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 Neely's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.
Decision pattern
Over 10 years on the bench, Judge Neely has demonstrated a consistent approach to disability claims. His approval rate in the latest reporting period was 71%. This figure aligns closely with his long-term performance, suggesting a stable decision-making pattern. These trends reflect how he has historically managed his caseload.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Neely'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 Neely? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Baltimore hearing office
The Baltimore Hearing Office serves a large population in Maryland, managing a high volume of disability cases with a team of 6 judges. The office currently maintains an approval rate of 66%. You can expect a review of your medical evidence and vocational history during your hearing. See the Baltimore Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. Within the Baltimore Hearing Office, approval rates among the 6 judges range from 46% to 81%. Because of this variance, the specific judge assigned to your case can influence the process. The guidance for your preparation remains consistent regardless of which judge you are assigned.
Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer
SSDI hearing approval rates — represented vs. on your own
Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.
