SSDI Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Charles C. Pearce

SSDI Administrative Law Judge at the Hattiesburg Hearing Office · 3 years on the bench · 7,238 lifetime decisions

Hearing scheduled with Judge Pearce?

Free Benefits Review →
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Judge Pearce maintains a lifetime approval rate of 51%, a figure derived from 7,238 decisions during his tenure. Compared to the latest reporting period, his performance is 3 points above the Hattiesburg Hearing Office average of 48% and 7 points below the national average of 58%. These statistics provide a broad view of his judicial history, though they do not predict the outcome of your specific case.

Metric Judge Pearce Hattiesburg National
Approval rate 51% 48% 58%
Fully favorable 43%
Denials 49%

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

Judge Pearce
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY18
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

Decision pattern

Over his 3 years on the bench, Judge Pearce has demonstrated a consistent decision-making pattern. His approval rate was 48% in 2016, 56% in 2017, and 51% in 2018. This trend reflects a stable approach to the evidence presented in his courtroom.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

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

Free Benefits Review
Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Hattiesburg hearing office

The Hattiesburg Hearing Office serves a significant population of applicants across Mississippi. With a bench of 6 judges, the office manages a high volume of cases and maintains an office-wide latest approval rate of 48%. If you are appearing here, you should be prepared for a formal process focused on your medical documentation and vocational evidence. You can visit the Hattiesburg Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration assigns cases to judges using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment is essentially random. Within the Hattiesburg Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the bench range from 26% to 63%. Because of this variance, understanding the local environment is helpful, but the core requirements for proving your disability remain consistent regardless of which judge you are assigned.

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