|
Post by aljsouth on Dec 19, 2007 10:32:16 GMT -5
So how does one handle "reams of paper" coming in at the last minute? If I get reams of paper at the hearing, I continue the case. This is not a terrible problem here. We get lots of smaller exhibits, but seldom more than 30 pages. I can quickly review that and hold the hearing. I spend most of my time with a file at ARPR, the first full reveiw by a judge. I make good notes. This way I can quickly incorporate new exhibits. I can't deal with 300 pages. This does happen. New regs have been proposed and put out for public comment that will close the record unless good cause is shown. I remain skeptical that ODAR/SSA will refuse any excuse. The Appeals council once ruled that " being high on drugs" was a good excuse for not going to the hearing.
|
|
|
Post by aljsouth on Dec 19, 2007 10:51:59 GMT -5
So how many hearings a day? In my home office I hold 5 to 6 a day. This way I can do other things as well. When I am on the road I hold 7 to 8 on a day. I have nothing else to work on while on the road, so I do more cases. A new judge almost always takes a lot longer to do a hearing than an experieced judge. Most of us learn not to ask as many questions as the training suggest. New judges tend to try to do a history and physical, this is not our job. Don't ask about vision if it has not been alleged, etc. Unrepresented claimants can be asked if there is anything else after you deal with the alleged impairments. You also learn not to ask a zillion hypotheticals. If you think a claimant's evidence shows a need for occasional postural limitations in a RFC, then give it . Don't give one hypothetical without posturals then one with it.
|
|
|
Post by jagghagg on Dec 28, 2007 11:41:01 GMT -5
<< >>
Someone quoted this post in the "distraction" thread. Probably a better place for it.
|
|
|
Post by alohastate on Jun 9, 2016 9:19:56 GMT -5
This is a great thread for those of us who wonder about the process of an administrative appeal, and the ALJ role in the process. I do have a question though:
Deadwood wrote:
"Great overall post.
Hopefully, the days of reps showing up with reams of evidence at the hearing will be coming to an end shortly. I have repeatedly heard that the regs are going to be changed, so that the record can be closed five days prior to the hearing."
My question: Have any of the regs been changed to allow the record to be closed prior to hearing, absent some pretty darned good cause? I can see if somebody just got a new evaluation, but if a rep shows up at a hearing with 300 pages of additional material, that probably just means the claimant/rep did not do their job. That's usually not a good reason for a continuance, imo, absent some compelling reason.
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Jun 9, 2016 10:32:42 GMT -5
Wow! I like the thread resuscitation! To answer your question, they've tried it in Region 1, and we keep getting told over and over they are hoping to have it nationwide in the relatively near future. I think it's in the works.
|
|
|
Post by cowboy on Jun 9, 2016 11:07:24 GMT -5
I don't think this will ever work and here's why: When I was a prosecutor, inevitably defense attorneys would present last minute evidence or witnesses prior to trial. Often it wasn't their fault as their clients were not great in getting evidence to them. In Arizona, we have specific disclosure rules to prevent that, but we quickly found out that applying those rules in preventing evidence from the defense got a quick remand for a new trial because it denied the defendant due process. This was very distressing to witnesses and victims that had to do the case all over again two years later.
I have seen similar responses from the Appeals Council (the last review of cases for the agency) and from the District Courts that review our decisions. In fact, we get remands on cases where evidence is submitted to the AC AFTER the decision was issued that the ALJ never saw, but needs further consideration. Even if rules are universally imposed to cut off last minute evidence, it is likely they cannot be enforced or defended.
Here's what I do: I don't review a case until the week of the hearing. This is in anticipation of newly incoming evidence. It prevents me from having to review a case three weeks ago, and then all over again weeks later when it is in ALPO. Since this is an old thread, I won't repeat what's above, but if anyone has questions about the detailed process I go through, I'd be happy to answer any questions.
|
|
|
Post by trekker on Jun 9, 2016 13:40:09 GMT -5
I know that I have said this before but I will say it again, having a drop dead date for submitting medical records sounds good in theory but as someone who has never purposefully withheld records, many times the obtaining of records are beyond the control of the representative. Given the two year delays (on average) for most claimants to receive a hearing date, it can be costly and a waste of time to ask for records early in the process and then just have to request and pay for them again when the hearing is scheduled. I know there are some reps who sought delays in the past but the reason was to drive up the back award. Don't have to do that now because the process is taking so long. Most of us request records as soon as the hearing is scheduled but there are some providers who no matter what I do, they will find something wrong with my request (like we just changed our HIPPA release - one word that probably was irrelevant or you asked for St. John's Hospital and the patient was actually seen at St. Mary's which is next door and part of our system and sure the address for requesting records for both hospitals come to the same address but your request was not correct). The providers, most of whom contract with a national company, have at least 30 days to respond, after payment is received, so I may not get the records until I have called a couple of times and I will get a few pages that will tell me the claimant was actually seen in St. Mary's clinic not St. Mary's hospital. This is the life of ODAR - dependent on DDS and representatives to get the records who are held hostage by health care providers and education systems that don't think any of us are a priority.
We can also talk about the reams of paper that are being submitted - especially now. I think that debate drives all of us crazy at this point. I now feel that I have to submit every single page of the records because I may be accused of misrepresentation or fraud if I thought it was okay to just submit the physician progress notes, discharge summaries etc after my eyes started to cross having to read all of the boring nursing notes, lab results, etc and I just missed one note out of 2,000 pages that said something that cast the patient in an unfavorable light. In the past, I submitted all of the relevant records and if there was unfavorable comments or information in them, I would just address it or advise the claimant that s/he was going to lose and should withdraw the hearing request.
My pet peeve is the rep who withdraws at the last minute. I am not an ALJ but I have had to deal with these poor claimants more than I care to do. This not only impacts the ODAR but adds to the wait that other claimants have. It just isn't fair. If I took the case thinking there was a reasonable argument, absent some very good reason (in jail, shooting heroin, working 40 hours a week for the past year...), I am going to continue representing the claimant. That is what professionals do. Just MHO.
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Jun 9, 2016 14:17:34 GMT -5
I don't expect perfection or every single record to be in the file, but a bigger pet peeve of mine is the rep that's hired in March 2014 and has submitted no records prior to a hearing in June 2016. Then they have the nerve to come in and say they they're not getting cooperation from the healthcare providers despite submitting three requests, the first of which was either at the hearing notice date or a month before the hearing. I don't expect reps to constantly churn records requests, but is getting them once every six months or even once a year overly demanding? I don't think so, and given that a large number of reps have most of the records in prior to the hearing notice or the hearing, I'm guessing most others don't, either. And those reps are every bit as bad as last-minute withdrawals because I'll postpone those hearings, too. There's nothing better than trying to hold a hearing in a case where you're missing the most recent 2 years of records.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Jun 9, 2016 17:16:26 GMT -5
This is a great thread for those of us who wonder about the process of an administrative appeal, and the ALJ role in the process. I do have a question though: Deadwood wrote: "Great overall post.
Hopefully, the days of reps showing up with reams of evidence at the hearing will be coming to an end shortly. I have repeatedly heard that the regs are going to be changed, so that the record can be closed five days prior to the hearing."
My question: Have any of the regs been changed to allow the record to be closed prior to hearing, absent some pretty darned good cause? I can see if somebody just got a new evaluation, but if a rep shows up at a hearing with 300 pages of additional material, that probably just means the claimant/rep did not do their job. That's usually not a good reason for a continuance, imo, absent some compelling reason. This guy rocked the search function or just did some kick butt archaeology. Either way Kudos.
|
|