|
|
Post by toast4u on Mar 2, 2023 20:02:15 GMT -5
SSA has many shortcomings but there are numerous issues in this article. My personal fave: "... it’s pretty easy to just deny a case and then move on.” The next article will be how the Agency pays too many individuals who are undeserving. I liked where the article talks about how the wrong person's medical records were being used, and the representative complaining about how appealing that is. While I obviously don't know details of that case- as a general rule who submits the medical records into evidence on represented cases? (Hint- it rhymes with schmepresentitive). I have to believe since the claimant was denied seven times, despite some medical records belonging to the wrong person, an unfavorable was likely justified. Just as likely, when the Court remand goes back to hearing with the incorrect records redacted, it will still be an unfavorable decision unless the claimant gets an ALJ who finds that "it's pretty easy to pay the case and then move on." |
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on Mar 2, 2023 21:38:10 GMT -5
SSA has many shortcomings but there are numerous issues in this article. My personal fave: "... it’s pretty easy to just deny a case and then move on.” The next article will be how the Agency pays too many individuals who are undeserving. It would certainly be far easier to do what the author did (and most authors who write this type of story do) and just accept everything we’re told as true without looking at any medical records. I’d have much more free time and could probably do 20 hearings daily. “Tell me why you can’t work. Sounds good to me!” Charles Hall once posted a similar article that shared the story of a 100% disabled 30-something vet that unfortunately underwent a below the knee amputation. The reporter was exasperated at how a VPAT case with an amputation after talking to him and his wife and hearing about how he couldn’t do anything, he’s never had a working prosthesis, etc. Interestingly, there was an article a year or two earlier where the same vet sung the praises of his prosthetic, explained all the things he could do with it, and said it almost felt like he’d never lost the leg because it worked so well. Which story is more reflective of his function? I have no idea because I didn’t look at his file. It wasn’t my case. But simply accepting naked statements as true to write a scathing story is just lazy. Doing it to adjudicate a claim is both lazy and contrary to our rules. |
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on Mar 2, 2023 21:39:41 GMT -5
SSA has many shortcomings but there are numerous issues in this article. My personal fave: "... it’s pretty easy to just deny a case and then move on.” The next article will be how the Agency pays too many individuals who are undeserving. Here's another thought, the article makes a big deal about $390 million in EAJA payments over the past decade without any context. Well, if you assume an average of $5k per case (which I think is likely on the low end, but it's a nice round number), that comes out to 78,000 total cases- in 10 years. Prior to the pandemic, I believe the average ALJ was issuing 450 decisions a year. The number of ALJs varies over the past decade, there are substantially less now than there were in 2019. But let's call it 1200 ALJs issuing those 450 decisions each, over 10 years. That's 5.4 million decisions over the past decade. So, that calculates out to roughly 1.5% of all decisions being ultimately remanded by the Federal Court. And, of course, as we all know, not all remands are created equally. In summary- journalism is dead. |
|
|
|
Post by Pixie on Mar 3, 2023 12:12:37 GMT -5
SSA has many shortcomings but there are numerous issues in this article. My personal fave: "... it’s pretty easy to just deny a case and then move on.” The next article will be how the Agency pays too many individuals who are undeserving. Here's another thought, the article makes a big deal about $390 million in EAJA payments over the past decade without any context. Well, if you assume an average of $5k per case (which I think is likely on the low end, but it's a nice round number), that comes out to 78,000 total cases- in 10 years. Prior to the pandemic, I believe the average ALJ was issuing 450 decisions a year. The number of ALJs varies over the past decade, there are substantially less now than there were in 2019. But let's call it 1200 ALJs issuing those 450 decisions each, over 10 years. That's 5.4 million decisions over the past decade. So, that calculates out to roughly 1.5% of all decisions being ultimately remanded by the Federal Court. And, of course, as we all know, not all remands are created equally.
In summary- journalism is dead. Agreed. And a major in "Journalism" is part of what killed it. All journalists should be required to have a major in English with a minor in a "real life" discipline. Pixie |
|
|
|
Post by faithfully on Mar 3, 2023 17:02:52 GMT -5
It's interesting that there is a lot of bashing of the journalist "wrong records" case without actually reading it or caring about the facts. What did he get wrong??? USDC decisions are PUBLIC. It is not hard to find. Feel free to just access PACER and learn from this ALJ's mistakes. First, the claimant, Mr. Harris who spoke to the journalist on TV, had a prior FAVORABLE ALJ decision for a closed period after many surgeries. So he had been denied several times in the past before being granted disability. He later filed again and was denied a couple more times before the decision complained of. Second, the records were ordered as part of the workup by the state agency. The prior files were not pulled. Judge Hanlon's decision notes that the state agency "medical consultants summarized medical evidence from the erroneous exhibit." The ALJ found their opinions persuasive and quoted the wrong records. The briefing shows that the ALJ actually questioned the claimant pointing to normal findings in records from the wrong patient. The agency was made aware and chose to defend in court. There is also another issue wherein the ALJ adjudicated part of the closed period grant. What a mess. I think there needs to be less bashing AND less jumping to conclusions.
|
|
|
|
Post by seaprongs on Mar 4, 2023 1:12:29 GMT -5
SSA has many shortcomings but there are numerous issues in this article. My personal fave: "... it’s pretty easy to just deny a case and then move on.” The next article will be how the Agency pays too many individuals who are undeserving. It would certainly be far easier to do what the author did (and most authors who write this type of story do) and just accept everything we’re told as true without looking at any medical records. I’d have much more free time and could probably do 20 hearings daily. “Tell me why you can’t work. Sounds good to me!” Charles Hall once posted a similar article that shared the story of a 100% disabled 30-something vet that unfortunately underwent a below the knee amputation. The reporter was exasperated at how a VPAT case with an amputation after talking to him and his wife and hearing about how he couldn’t do anything, he’s never had a working prosthesis, etc. Interestingly, there was an article a year or two earlier where the same vet sung the praises of his prosthetic, explained all the things he could do with it, and said it almost felt like he’d never lost the leg because it worked so well. Which story is more reflective of his function? I have no idea because I didn’t look at his file. It wasn’t my case. But simply accepting naked statements as true to write a scathing story is just lazy. Doing it to adjudicate a claim is both lazy and contrary to our rules. Yeah, these stories take the claimant's account and accept it as fact. Another issue I notice is that many people - including journalists - don't understand how stringent the SSA disability standard is. It's harder to get SSA disability than virtually any other "disability" program like VA disability or private insurance LTD. Yes, the claimant might be limited physically or mentally. Yes, the claimant might take a lot of medications or need regular medical care. It doesn't mean they meet the SSA definition of disability, even if they have a compelling or sympathetic personal story. In fact, we deny a lot of people whose lives have been unfortunately altered by illness or injury. Take a basic fact pattern we see every day: Claimant gets hurt at work, and multiple doctors say he can't go back to his old job. In fact, they write letters saying he is "disabled." If you asked a random person unfamiliar with SSA disability law if that claimant qualifies, all of them say yes. But we know this case is not necessarily a slam dunk, especially if he's young. Maybe he really can't go back to his past work, but does he have transferable skills? Can he do other work? It's a high standard, but most people don't know that. I think what irks me is that these articles often imply that people at SSA don't care and just coldly reject people, when I work with a lot of people who very much care about getting the right result under the program rules. |
|
|
|
Post by ba on Mar 4, 2023 17:24:52 GMT -5
SSA has many shortcomings but there are numerous issues in this article. My personal fave: "... it’s pretty easy to just deny a case and then move on.” The next article will be how the Agency pays too many individuals who are undeserving. Charles Hall once posted a similar article that shared the story of a 100% disabled 30-something vet that unfortunately underwent a below the knee amputation. The reporter was exasperated at how a VPAT case with an amputation after talking to him and his wife and hearing about how he couldn’t do anything, he’s never had a working prosthesis, etc. Interestingly, there was an article a year or two earlier where the same vet sung the praises of his prosthetic, explained all the things he could do with it, and said it almost felt like he’d never lost the leg because it worked so well. Which story is more reflective of his function? I have no idea because I didn’t look at his file. It wasn’t my case. But simply accepting naked statements as true to write a scathing story is just lazy. Doing it to adjudicate a claim is both lazy and contrary to our rules. I’m aware of a judge that did exactly this (“Well, representative, you know your client better than I do. What do you think his RFC is?”). And he was among those listed in a House report that many of us are aware of about how the agency, rather than retraining him, moved him from office to office to work down backlogs. |
|
|
|
Post by arkstfan on Mar 8, 2023 22:39:20 GMT -5
The days the job sucks are the ones where someone had an occupation that paid nicely. They devote a couple or three decades to the work. They get sick or get hurt. They can’t do that job anymore. The jobs they can perform pay notably less.
They aren’t experts in disability law and learn to their surprise that not only will the system not make them whole, they don’t even qualify. Hate it but telling them no is the job and I get to be the SOB not the people who made the rules
|
|
|
|
Post by AAmillennial on May 25, 2023 13:26:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by jagvet on May 25, 2023 16:54:54 GMT -5
Typical Washington Post biased story. "Critics say" and "sources claim" throughout the story. Quoting US District Judge Susan Illston is amusing. She remands every case, sources claim. It's a shame Judge Richard Posner has retired. He might have piled on, too. Oh and yes, the complaint that ALJs just find a way to deny again after remand? Mr. Sheldon got his money after all. You just have to read to the end to see that. And the Conn case? Just some lawyer's fraud scheme and Congress overreacted? No. ALJ David Daugherty was a key part of it. Conn got $600 million and Daugherty $600,000. In other words, an ALJ skimmed 10% in bribes to throw Conn's cases. Conn is serving 27 years and Daugherty died while serving 12 years. The point of the article seems to be that every ALJ should throw every case. I can't say that such a result is justice. |
|
|
|
Post by rp on May 25, 2023 18:11:29 GMT -5
Absolutely no mention of the AC? Hmmmm…. |
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on May 25, 2023 18:41:34 GMT -5
Absolutely no mention of the AC? Hmmmm…. They are briefly mentioned when describing the Appeals process. But, acknowledging that there is a step where the agency reviews the decision for errors before the case has to be appealed to Federal Court- that would conflict with the narrative. |
|
|
|
Post by hopefalj on May 25, 2023 21:50:38 GMT -5
There was a point in time when I cared about district court appeals and giving as much detail as was feasible in my decisions so that OGC could defend them. I’ve seen enough from both groups in my tenure that I no longer do. My focus is on making the best supported decision or the most correct decision. Drafting it is someone else’s job.
Godspeed to everyone else that still puts extra effort into editing /supplementing their decisions. I applaud your resilience, you modern day Sisyphuses (Sisyphi?).
|
|
|
|
Post by roymcavoy on May 25, 2023 23:56:53 GMT -5
the headliner of the story, claiming he is disabled, while being photographed behind the wheel of a truck….. not that ability to drive is the disability litmus test, but…….. c’mon man |
|
|
|
Post by nylawyer on May 26, 2023 2:08:40 GMT -5
the headliner of the story, claiming he is disabled, while being photographed behind the wheel of a truck….. not that ability to drive is the disability litmus test, but…….. c’mon man There is nothing remotely inconsistent with the ability to drive and being disabled. Having said that- I'd love to know if the claimant at his hearing(s) testified to a complete inability to drive. |
|
|
|
Post by roymcavoy on May 26, 2023 5:55:11 GMT -5
the headliner of the story, claiming he is disabled, while being photographed behind the wheel of a truck….. not that ability to drive is the disability litmus test, but…….. c’mon man There is nothing remotely inconsistent with the ability to drive and being disabled. Having said that- I'd love to know if the claimant at his hearing(s) testified to a complete inability to drive. 👍👍. My point… exactly. Or can’t do any number of things necessary to driving. |
|
|
|
Post by ohodiablo on May 26, 2023 10:08:19 GMT -5
The agency put a huge emphasis on working the back log. They placed unrealistic production demands on judges and writers and now they are in the find out stage. I'm not sure they care.
|
|
|
|
Post by hillsarealive on May 26, 2023 10:36:47 GMT -5
Typical Washington Post biased story. "Critics say" and "sources claim" throughout the story. Quoting US District Judge Susan Illston is amusing. She remands every case, sources claim. It's a shame Judge Richard Posner has retired. He might have piled on, too. Oh and yes, the complaint that ALJs just find a way to deny again after remand? Mr. Sheldon got his money after all. You just have to read to the end to see that. And the Conn case? Just some lawyer's fraud scheme and Congress overreacted? No. ALJ David Daugherty was a key part of it. Conn got $600 million and Daugherty $600,000. In other words, an ALJ skimmed 10% in bribes to throw Conn's cases. Conn is serving 27 years and Daugherty died while serving 12 years. The point of the article seems to be that every ALJ should throw every case. I can't say that such a result is justice. My main gripe with this article is that it doesn't mention the standard for being disabled. That is a critical piece of information for the reader. Disability can mean different things in different contexts. Having "a disability" (say hearing loss, major depressive disorder, or a back injury etc) isn't the same thing as being disabled for SSA benefits purposes, but I doubt the average reader would know that (and they certainly wouldn't learn it from this article). |
|
|
|
Post by desperado on May 27, 2023 8:10:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by elninost0rm on May 28, 2023 7:01:08 GMT -5
The paralegals in my office are among the highest and most accurate producers. YMMV. |
|
