SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Sabrina M. Tilley

Position Administrative Law Judge
On record SSA records since 2016
Decisions 2,299 lifetime

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

The approval rate for Sabrina M. Tilley stands at 64% over 2,299 lifetime decisions. This figure sits within the broader 39% to 78% lifetime approval range observed among the nine judges who have served at the Charleston WV office since 2016. These statistics are derived from a significant volume of cases, providing a stable view of past judicial patterns. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Lifetime SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 64%
Decisions on record 2,299

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Tilley. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 29, 2023. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

Year-over-year approval rate across Judge Tilley's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Tilley
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY23
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate (SSA's term: allowance rate) = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total decisions, which exclude dismissals.

Decision pattern

Sabrina M. Tilley's record shows a dynamic trend since 2016. After an initial approval rate of 47% in 2016, the figures rose to a peak of 74% in 2019 before stabilizing in the mid-60% range in recent years. This pattern reflects a consistent approach to evaluating your disability claim over the course of 2,299 total decisions. The latest period indicates a steady continuation of this established decision-making style.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Tilley'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 scheduled?

Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Charleston WV hearing office

The Charleston WV hearing office serves you and other claimants throughout the region, managing a diverse caseload of disability applications. With a bench of nine judges on record since 2016, the office operates within a system designed to ensure consistent review of your complex medical and vocational evidence. You can visit the Charleston WV Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration assigns cases using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. There are nine judges on record at this office since 2016, three of whom are reported in the latest SSA data. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 39% to 78% on a lifetime basis. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
baseline approval rate
Unrepresented claimants
WITH A LAWYER
~3×
higher approval rate
Represented claimants

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