Michael J. Stacchini has a lifetime approval rate of 60% across 19,398 decisions, which sits above the national average of 58%. While his recent approval rate of 65% is slightly below the 67% office average, his 10-year tenure shows a consistent approach to case evaluation. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for the specific requirements of this judge's courtroom.
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
Comparing a judge's performance requires looking at both lifetime and recent data. Judge Stacchini has maintained a 60% lifetime approval rate over his 10-year career. In the most recent reporting period, his 65% approval rate tracks closely with his long-term trends while remaining above the 58% national average. These aggregate rates describe past decisions rather than predicting the outcome of your specific 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 Stacchini'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 his 10 years on the bench, Judge Stacchini has demonstrated a steady decision-making pattern. His approval rates have fluctuated, with a notable recent performance of 66% in 2024 and 64% in 2025. This recent activity indicates a continuation of his long-term approach to case evaluation.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Stacchini'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 Stacchini? See if a free benefits review fits your case.
Check My BenefitsAbout the White Plains hearing office
The White Plains Hearing Office serves a diverse population, managing a high volume of Social Security Disability Insurance cases. With a bench of 6 judges, the office maintains an average approval rate that reflects the local caseload complexity. If you are appearing here, you should be prepared for a formal hearing process that emphasizes medical documentation and vocational evidence.
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 White Plains Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the 6 judges range from 50% to 74%. Because every judge operates with their own judicial philosophy, understanding the office-wide environment is helpful for your preparation.
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.
