SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Gregory White

SSA Administrative Law Judge at the NHC St Louis Hearing Office · 10 years on the bench · 17,385 lifetime decisions

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review →
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Judge Gregory White maintains a lifetime approval rate of 58% based on 17,385 total decisions. In the latest reporting period, the judge shows a 68% approval rate, which sits 12 percentage points above the current NHC St Louis office average and 6 points above the state average. These metrics provide a statistical look at how cases have been decided over the judge's 10-year tenure. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for individual hearings.

Metric Judge White NHC St Louis National
Approval rate 58% 58%
Fully favorable 49%
Denials 42%

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

Judge White
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY25
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

Decision pattern

Over the past decade, your judge's approval rate has shifted, moving from a low of 34% in 2018 to a more recent period of higher approvals. The data shows an upward trend starting in 2021, with the judge consistently approving cases at rates above 65% in recent years. This pattern reflects a shift in case outcomes that deviates from the earlier, more restrictive years of the judge's tenure.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge White'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 NHC St Louis hearing office

The NHC St Louis Hearing Office serves claimants across Missouri, managing a high volume of disability appeals. The office currently reports an average approval rate of 46%, which serves as a baseline for the region. You should be prepared for a thorough review of your medical records and work history when appearing at this office. You can see the NHC St Louis Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. Across the NHC St Louis office, lifetime approval rates among the bench range from 41% to 70%. Because you cannot choose your judge, it is important to focus on the strength of your medical evidence and vocational testimony. The guidance for your hearing remains consistent regardless of which judge you are assigned.

Your odds change dramatically 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