|
Post by marten77 on Mar 22, 2013 13:59:34 GMT -5
Thankfully, where I am at, quality has been emphasized over quantity for quite a while now. I have had the chance to see decisions from other places and was rather shocked at what passed for acceptable in other places. If I were allowed to write like some of the decisions I saw, I would be able to blow a hole in any productivity ceiling they wanted to throw at me. However, I do take pride in my work. I probably would never allow myself to write like that in the first place.
|
|
|
Post by jibtrimmer on Mar 22, 2013 15:40:27 GMT -5
[quote author=privateatty board=general thread=2076 post=36319 time=1363917916 This insistence that proceedings are "non-adversarial" to me is very strange. Cases are won and lost primarily on evidence adduced (or non-adduced). That to me is lawyering 101.
[/quote] Hearings are non-adversarial in the sense there are not opposing advocates arguing or presenting their respective positions. Certainly, the claimant is in an adversary position to the Agency, but the Agency is not represented. It was once well-explained to me as an "inquisitorial" proceeding, more akin to trials in a civil law system like Germany or France. This in turn places an additional burden on the ALJ, who has an affirmative responsibility to pursue and resolve any issue which may emerge, and develop the full record of evidence.
Noch ein bier, Bitte.
|
|
|
Post by aljustice on Sept 15, 2013 17:57:07 GMT -5
Can you update with more duties of typical ALJs?
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Sept 15, 2013 18:37:37 GMT -5
Can you update with more duties of typical ALJs? Aljustice there are many books and articles you can find through Google on the duties of ALJs. It differs a little depending upon the agency the ALJ works for. I think a little bit of research and reading of a lot of the old threads on this Board will be helpful in answering many of your questions about being an ALJ. You seem to have many questions and the best way to learn is with research and reading. If you get stuck or have a question not answered in the threads, then come back and ask them.
|
|
|
Post by 71stretch on Sept 15, 2013 18:46:41 GMT -5
And, it makes a difference whether you are talking about federal ALJs or state ones. In either category, their duties can vary quite a bit depending on the agency or agencies they serve and the level of appeal they are working at. The job descriptions for each specific classification will tell you a lot about what ALJs in that particular classification do.
|
|
|
Post by lildavey on Sept 16, 2013 11:48:25 GMT -5
Bartleby is SPOT ON! That is exactly how it works at ODAR. They say they want quality decisions, but the only thing you'll get beat up on is whether you have producd a sufficient number of widgets. That's very interesting. From all that I've read an ALJ is a fairly autonomous entity. They are not subject to periodic performance reviews and the only way to fire them, or so it seems, is to indict them on felony charges. So this beating up and butt-chewing is somewhat of a surprise. Love to hear from more judges on this topic. Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by decadealj on Sept 16, 2013 12:07:10 GMT -5
mcb- thank you for providing an easy link to ALJ (Ret)Dave Hatfield's assessment of the duties of an ALJ in the current hearing regulatory process. It should be required reading for all ALJs- I doubt very seriously that many would disagree with it and provides information explaining why so many of us were frustrated with the appellate process. And remember he was writing FOR the agency! Sure would be nice to see some of his recommendations implemented.
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Sept 16, 2013 18:20:46 GMT -5
Bartleby is SPOT ON! That is exactly how it works at ODAR. They say they want quality decisions, but the only thing you'll get beat up on is whether you have producd a sufficient number of widgets. That's very interesting. From all that I've read an ALJ is a fairly autonomous entity. They are not subject to periodic performance reviews and the only way to fire them, or so it seems, is to indict them on felony charges. So this beating up and butt-chewing is somewhat of a surprise. Love to hear from more judges on this topic. Thanks! Read the Abrams, Shapiro and Long decisions. You can google them in Google Scholar using SSA or the Commissioner as well. OCALJ/SSA and the ALJs they have gone after haves made alot of case law lately, much of it contradicting what you have posted.
|
|
|
Post by lildavey on Sept 16, 2013 19:03:26 GMT -5
That's very interesting. From all that I've read an ALJ is a fairly autonomous entity. They are not subject to periodic performance reviews and the only way to fire them, or so it seems, is to indict them on felony charges. So this beating up and butt-chewing is somewhat of a surprise. Love to hear from more judges on this topic. Thanks! Read the Abrams, Shapiro and Long decisions. You can google them in Google Scholar using SSA or the Commissioner as well. OCALJ/SSA and the ALJs they have gone after haves made alot of case law lately, much of it contradicting what you have posted. Thanks for the tip.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Sept 17, 2013 9:20:38 GMT -5
Read the Abrams, Shapiro and Long decisions. You can google them in Google Scholar using SSA or the Commissioner as well. OCALJ/SSA and the ALJs they have gone after haves made alot of case law lately, much of it contradicting what you have posted. Sorry to be a pain but I am having a heck of a time finding these cases with just the search terms you gave (the names are just to common). If you could give us the year and state the case arose in it would be a huge help. Thanks for the information.
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Sept 17, 2013 9:57:07 GMT -5
Read the Abrams, Shapiro and Long decisions. You can google them in Google Scholar using SSA or the Commissioner as well. OCALJ/SSA and the ALJs they have gone after haves made alot of case law lately, much of it contradicting what you have posted. Sorry to be a pain but I am having a heck of a time finding these cases with just the search terms you gave (the names are just to common). If you could give us the year and state the case arose in it would be a huge help. Thanks for the information. Here is the Shapiro decision: Shapiro decisionHere is the Long decision: Long Decision Here is the Abrams decision: Abrams decisionI hope it helps.
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Sept 17, 2013 10:03:43 GMT -5
Read the Abrams, Shapiro and Long decisions. You can google them in Google Scholar using SSA or the Commissioner as well. OCALJ/SSA and the ALJs they have gone after haves made alot of case law lately, much of it contradicting what you have posted. Sorry to be a pain but I am having a heck of a time finding these cases with just the search terms you gave (the names are just to common). If you could give us the year and state the case arose in it would be a huge help. Thanks for the information. Gaidan, Not sure these links will work for you, but here are the cases. Shapiro: www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=7fb10c3a122e708f19484e32e9943a89&docnum=1&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzk-zSkAb&_md5=75c6ffbaf22dc53dded1debefdad310a DOCKET NUMBER CB-7521-11-0024-T-1 , MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD , 2012 MSPB LEXIS 6123, October 18, 2012 Abrams: www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=ad584e9ab48781f0a1c28ea59e9a7f8b&docnum=10&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzk-zSkAb&_md5=855210ac4f9a6f7648f42a043a3e3bf4 703 F.3d 538; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 26632, December 28, 2012 Long: www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=a93179709decd1d4685d61a615194e90&docnum=1&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLzVzk-zSkAb&_md5=b9a9660838257f8faee34eaa4b6ecaa0 635 F.3d 526; 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 5005, March 14, 2011
|
|
|
Post by sealaw90 on Sept 17, 2013 10:05:06 GMT -5
Sorry to be a pain but I am having a heck of a time finding these cases with just the search terms you gave (the names are just to common). If you could give us the year and state the case arose in it would be a huge help. Thanks for the information. Here is the Shapiro decision: Shapiro decisionHere is the Long decision: Long Decision The Abrams link was quoted earlier in this thread. I hope it helps. HAH! mpd - i gues your computer is not as slow as mine!
|
|
|
Post by moopigsdad on Sept 17, 2013 10:07:30 GMT -5
HAH! mpd - i gues your computer is not as slow as mine! Either that or I can type faster and find the quoted cases slightly easier. However, I do know they could be found with research, as you and I evidently found them. However, I don't mind assisting those who want to read them with the links to the decisions, so as to make it much easier. Thanks sealaw90 for the assumption my computer is faster.
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Sept 17, 2013 10:40:14 GMT -5
Thank you both.
|
|
|
Post by redryder on Sept 17, 2013 13:12:03 GMT -5
You can look at the MSPB decisions at www.mspb.gov. There are precedential and non-precedential decisions. To find them, you have to do a search inserting "Social" as the appellant's first name and "Security" as the last name. If you insert Social Security as the agency, you will not get these cases.
|
|
|
Post by privateatty on Sept 17, 2013 18:54:37 GMT -5
The way to do free research and what I was referring to as Google Scholar can be accessed by going to "More" in Google, then "Even More". That will put you to Scholar (scroll down a dozen or more) and then you can choose your Court. You would be surprised at how many Federal and State Court decisions are there.
|
|
|
Post by crab on Sept 17, 2013 20:02:09 GMT -5
The way to do free research and what I was referring to as Google Scholar can be accessed by going to "More" in Google, then "Even More". That will put you to Scholar (scroll down a dozen or more) and then you can choose your Court. You would be surprised at how many Federal and State Court decisions are there. Thanks for the tip, Privateatty!
|
|
|
Post by Gaidin on Sept 17, 2013 20:25:24 GMT -5
The way to do free research and what I was referring to as Google Scholar can be accessed by going to "More" in Google, then "Even More". That will put you to Scholar (scroll down a dozen or more) and then you can choose your Court. You would be surprised at how many Federal and State Court decisions are there. Thanks indeed.
|
|
|
Post by mcb on Sept 20, 2013 15:34:03 GMT -5
|
|