SSDI Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Judith M. Stolfo

SSDI Administrative Law Judge at the Springfield MA Hearing Office · 3 years on the bench · 6,008 lifetime decisions

Hearing scheduled with Judge Stolfo?

Free Benefits Review →
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Judge Stolfo maintains a lifetime approval rate of 62%. Her recent performance is 3 percentage points higher than the Springfield MA office average, 6 points above the state average, and 4 points above the national average. These figures are derived from a docket of 6,008 lifetime decisions. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Metric Judge Stolfo Springfield MA National
Approval rate 62% 59% 58%
Fully favorable 53%
Denials 38%

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

Judge Stolfo
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 her 3 years on the bench, Judge Stolfo has demonstrated a consistent approach to disability adjudication. Her approval rates have remained steady, moving from 62% in 2016 to 63% in 2017, and returning to 62% in 2018. This stability suggests a predictable decision-making process. The data reflects a continuation of this steady pattern throughout her tenure.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Stolfo'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 Stolfo? See if a free benefits review fits your case.

Free Benefits Review
Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Springfield MA hearing office

The Springfield MA Hearing Office serves a large population across Massachusetts. With 6 judges on the bench, the office maintains a latest approval rate of 59%. You can expect a professional environment focused on the evaluation of medical and vocational evidence. You can see the Springfield MA Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Within the Springfield MA office, lifetime approval rates among the 6 judges vary, ranging from 42% to 65%. This variance highlights why your specific case evidence remains the most important factor in your hearing. You can review the full ALJ roster on the Springfield MA Hearing Office page.

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