20 C.F.R. § 404.940

Disqualification of the administrative law judge

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

An administrative law judge shall not conduct a hearing if he or she is prejudiced or partial with respect to any party or has any interest in the matter pending for decision. If you object to the administrative law judge who will conduct the hearing, you must notify the administrative law judge at your earliest opportunity. The administrative law judge shall consider your objections and shall decide whether to proceed with the hearing or withdraw. If he or she withdraws, the Associate Commissioner for Hearings and Appeals, or his or her delegate, will appoint another administrative law judge to conduct the hearing. If the administrative law judge does not withdraw, you may, after the hearing, present your objections to the Appeals Council as reasons why the hearing decision should be revised or a new hearing held before another administrative law judge.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 133 cases (27 in the last 5 years), 1963–2025 · leading case: Hans Schink v. Commissioner of Social Security

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hans Schink v. Commissioner of Social Security (2019) ca11 · cites it 3× “; see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.940 . The regulations themselves provide a process for disqualification, stating that an ALJ "shall not conduct a hearing if he or she is prejudiced or partial with respect to any party or has any interest in the matter pending for decision.”

Miles v. Chater (1996) ca11 · cites it 2× “” 20 C.F.R. § 404.940 . When a claimant objects to the assignment of a particular ALJ to his or her case, he or she must notify the ALJ at the earliest opportunity.”

Judylee C. Jarrett v. Commissioner of Social Security (2011) ca11 · cites it 3× “at 1400 (quoting 20 C.F.R. § 404.940 ). If a claimant fears that a particular ALJ will not provide a fair hearing, she must notify the ALJ at the “earliest opportunity.”

Muhammad v. Berryhill (2019) paed · cites it 2× “" 20 C.F.R. § 404.940 . 5 The ALJ must then decide whether to proceed with the hearing or withdraw.”

Sutherland v. Barnhart (2004) nyed · cites it 2× “Accordingly, the court will not now consider this third argument. 4. A Different ALJ The plaintiff requests that the district court remand to a new ALJ, because of ALJ Levin’s “inappropriate hostility.”

Tennille G. Sheehan v. Secretary of Health, Education & Welfare (1979) ca8 · cites it 4× “20 C.F.R. § 404.940 (1977). Upon request by the Appeals Council, claimant’s wife thereafter filed affidavits alleging the late filing resulted from the disability of Sheehan and statements made by a local representative of the Social Security Administration that Sheehan had 90…”

Carr v. Commissioner, SSA (2020) ca10 “, 20 C.F.R. § 404.940 (explaining that a claimant who believes an ALJ is prejudiced “must notify the [ALJ of the objection] at [the] earliest opportunity”); Muhammad v.”

Diane S. P. v. Berryhill (2019) vaed · cites it 3× “20 C.F.R. §§ 404.940 (noting that the ALJ "shall not conduct a hearing if he or she is prejudiced or partial with respect to any party or has any interest in the matter pending for decision"), 416.”

Sprouse v. Berryhill (2019) njd · cites it 2× “20 CFR § 404.940 . 2 The Abbington court also differentiated this type of a challenge from that presented in Sims : Unlike the cursory form request for Appeals Council review examined in Sims , which "strongly suggest[ed] that the Council does not depend much, if at all, on…”

David B. Lowry v. Jo Anne Barnhart, in Her Capacity as Commissioner of the Social Security Administration Dan Hyatt Rile (2003) ca9 “” 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.940 , 416.1440. Unlike the 1992 interim bias procedures, however, these regulations address only bias against a party, not bias against a party’s representative.”

Stephen R. VENTURA v. Donna E. SHALALA, Secretary of Health and Human Services. Stephen Ventura, Appellant (1995) ca3 “20 C.F.R. §§ 404.940 , 416.1440 (1994). The claimant must bring any objections to the attention of the ALJ, and the ALJ shall decide whether to continue the hearing or withdraw.”

Dioguardi v. Commissioner of Social Security (2006) nywd “1998) (whether to assign a new ALJ on remand is generally a determination for the Commissioner); see also 20 C.F.R. § 404.940 . CONCLUSION The Commissioner’s motion for judgment on the pleadings (Dkt.”

Show all 133 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.