3.5 based on 14 reviews


  1. Anonymous says:

    I found Judge Flanagan to be very thorough, and his line of questioning was thoughtful and precise. He is clearly dedicated to only awarding SSDI benefits to those who are truly unable to work, which I personally find commendable.

    Yes, he does ask some questions several times after re-wording them, but as long as the applicant is being honest, the answers should always be the same, regardless of how the question is framed.

    Sadly, there are MANY people who apply for SSDI who are not truly disabled; Judge Flanagan makes every effort to ferret such people out and deny them benefits.

    While it is unfortunate that the general mindset toward SSDI applicants is that they are able-bodied until they prove themselves to be disabled beyond a shadow of a doubt, applicants can thank the MANY people who try to scam the system and obtain benefits when they are not truly disabled for this.

    In other words, Judge Flanagan is not “the bad guy” in this scenario. To the contrary, it is the lying deadbeats who stand before him and his colleagues claiming to be disabled when they are not who have made the journey to receiving SSDI benefits as tedious and demeaning as it is.

    I am giving Judge Flanagan four stars instead of five because I did not agree with his decision to award my counsel full legal fees. As he was aware, she made a number of serious mistakes/oversights in presenting my case, and was extremely unprofessional.

    When Judge Flanagan contacted me and asked for my input, I provided what I felt was a solid argument as to why my attorney did not deserve to be awarded full compensation. While I was disappointed with his decision to award her the full $6,000, I was otherwise quite pleased with his handling of my case.

    I realize there will be many people who disagree with my opinion – but it is just that: MY opinion, based on MY personal experience with Judge Flanagan.

    Clearly, people rush to post negative remarks about Judge Flanagan when they are not awarded benefits. My hope is that my positive experience with Judge Flanagan will balance things out a bit.

    If your SSDI hearing has been assigned to Judge Flanagan’s calendar, I believe you will get a fair hearing. If you are truly disabled and provide a scrupulously honest testimony, you will likely receive a favorable ruling.

    Is it possible that Judge Flanagan sometimes makes a mistake and denies benefits to someone who is truly disabled? Of course – he is human.

    Judge Flanagan has a responsibility to all taxpayers to be as thorough as possible when hearing cases and rendering decisions, and I believe it is to his credit that he takes that responsibility very seriously.

  2. wade kirkley says:

    I was in the 207 denied. He judged my personal life instead of medical thats wrong. I wake up all time thinking what i should have told him. My attorney suxs.when we first walked in the judgement room my atty daid judge i have another case in 45 mins judge said it wont take to long i was scared to day anything my atty advised me to say as little as possible. Now if i could work no one hire me im a liability. Ins cost to much. Im screwed thank judge for everything u didnt do. Now how am i going to support my family. I havent able to by christmas gifts for 2 years

  3. Steven Kirks says:

    Judge Flanagan flat out lied to me. Then did not even have the decency to send me notice that he dismissed my appeal. I was told to wait until a decision was reached and finally called only to find out he had dismissed my case two months prior. Talk about ineptitude.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Should be removed from the bench. He has an agenda. Denies approximately 90 percent of claims. I have had clients die shortly after he denied their claim. He has no business being a judge. A disgrace.

  5. Anonymous says:

    SSA should remove this person from the bench before more deserving American citizens die because he illegally and improperly denied their claim. He does not understand the law or how to apply it. If you case is assigned to this judge, you should demand that your case be assigned to a different judge before your hearing is held.

  6. Anonymous says:

    I wouldn’t love him as a taxpayer either. He wastes money. Why don’t we just save money by not having a hearing since he routinely goes with the agency opinion no matter what. Not to mention the waste of money from appealing it to the AC and then having it remanded only to go in front of this fool again.

  7. Anonymous says:

    Interesting guy. Uber conservative. He asks the same question many times, then if any of the answers are not identical, concludes that the testimony is inconsistent. Plays “gotcha” with the evidence. Starts from an “unfavorable” vantage, and is rarely moved from it. Looks like he really enjoys the torment of the hearings process. Lulls the rep into a sense of complacency by posing favorable hypotheticals that he has absolutely no intention of ever considering. In his eyes, everyone is a faking cheat. As a taxpayer, I love him. Otherwise, not so much.

  8. Anonymous says:

    This guy seems to think that all DDS decisions are correct. They why have ALJs? If this is acceptable performance, then let’s go straight from DDS to civil court. Hope you lose your job, ALJ (i.e. not a real judge) Flanagan.

  9. Anonymous says:

    His approval rating hs gone consistently down over the last couple of years. I think his decisions are poorly written. He comes across as an arrogant jerk.

  10. Anonymous says:

    thank you disability pro you are 100 percent rite with what you have said we are in the market for a new laywer to represent us on our apeal if interested write
    eback and i will foward my info

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *