SSDI Administrative Law Judge

Hon. James Stewart

SSDI Administrative Law Judge at the Tulsa Hearing Office · 7 years on the bench · 12,210 lifetime decisions

Hearing scheduled with Judge Stewart?

Free Benefits Review →
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Judge Stewart’s 67% lifetime approval rate provides a clear baseline when compared to the Tulsa Hearing Office latest rate of 64% and the national average of 58%. With over 12,210 decisions, the data offers a significant look at how this judge approaches disability claims. These figures help you understand the broader context of your upcoming hearing. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Metric Judge Stewart Tulsa National
Approval rate 67% 64% 58%
Fully favorable 57%
Denials 33%

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

Judge Stewart
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY22
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

Decision pattern

Over a 7-year tenure, Judge Stewart has maintained a steady approval pattern. While yearly rates have fluctuated between 63% and 71%, the overall trend remains consistent with the long-term average. Recent data shows the judge continues to align closely with historical performance, suggesting a predictable approach to case evaluation. This stability allows you to focus on the core evidence of your claim.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

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

Free Benefits Review
Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Tulsa hearing office

The Tulsa Hearing Office serves a wide region in Oklahoma, managing a high volume of SSDI and SSI cases. The office maintains an active bench of 6 judges who handle thousands of hearings annually. You can expect a professional environment focused on the rigorous review of medical and vocational evidence. See the Tulsa 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 judge is assigned randomly. At the Tulsa Hearing Office, approval rates among the bench vary significantly, ranging from 38% to 81%. This variance highlights why focusing on your own medical evidence is more important than the specific judge assigned. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same 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