Judges at this hearing office vary in approval rates and decision volume. Select a judge to view individual statistics.
(Judge-level statistics reflect the most recent fiscal year with available data.
Approval rates may vary over time and by case type.)
| Judge Name | Approval Rate | Compared to Office Average | Decision Count | Data Recency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marsha Stroup | 50% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 16 | 2015 |
| Stewart Stallings | 47% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 215 | 2016 |
| Jennifer A Simmons | 50% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 2 | 2017 |
| E. W Shaffer | 57% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 2,082 | 2013 |
| Earl W Shaffer | 51% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 1,308 | 2017 |
| Kurt D Schuman | 33% | Below (office avg. 37%) | 1,723 | 2025 |
| William Musseman | 26% | Below (office avg. 37%) | 6,324 | 2020 |
| Ann F MacMurray | 39% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 110 | 2018 |
| Richard J Maddigan | 59% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 3,214 | 2015 |
| NICHOLAS J LO BURGIO | 100% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 1 | 2016 |
| JON L LAWRITSON | 50% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 2 | 2017 |
| Robert J Labrum | 0% | Below (office avg. 37%) | 2 | 2019 |
| Matthew C Kawalek | 32% | Below (office avg. 37%) | 2,114 | 2025 |
| Bryan Henry | 34% | Below (office avg. 37%) | 1,414 | 2025 |
| Jennifer M Fellabaum | 42% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 870 | 2019 |
| Jennifer Fellabaum | 50% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 92 | 2016 |
| Debra J Denney | 40% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 5 | 2016 |
| Mark R Dawson | 56% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 18 | 2017 |
| Diane S Davis | 16% | Below (office avg. 37%) | 988 | 2025 |
| Kathryn D Burgchardt | 42% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 5,224 | 2020 |
| Laura Broniak | 46% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 70 | 2017 |
| Debra Boudreau | 41% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 2,085 | 2016 |
| Debra L Boudreau | 40% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 1,500 | 2025 |
| John A Beall | 44% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 756 | 2017 |
| Peggy S Ball | 56% | Above (office avg. 37%) | 2,373 | 2013 |
These statistics provide additional context about how cases are processed at this hearing office.
They reflect system-level activity, not individual judge decision behavior, and may vary based on administrative and procedural factors.