An attorney and a judge, bitter enemies, arrive at an elevator at the same time. They argue over who gets to ride down, then scuffle. Police arrest the attorney, who slaps a restraining order on the judge.
Sounds like a lame lawyer joke. But no. The flap occurred recently at Social Security's customarily sedate hearing office in downtown Portland, the climactic moment in a testy three-year war of words between a disability claims attorney and an administrative law judge.
Let me generalize a bit. This ridiculous situation vividly demonstrates the need for a full set of disciplinary rules for those who represent Social Security claimants. Most non-attorney representatives and attorneys working outside the states in which they are licensed act responsibly but not all of them.
7 comments:
Mr hall,
I doubt the attorney has full blame. I suspect some of these administrative law judges deny benefits because they can.
You are right discipline is needed but also monetary punitive action against these administrative law fools. Administrative law fools receive too much of tax payer money.
Actually, this story does not come close to revealing the extent of this attorney's unethical conduct. SSA has moved too slowly in pursuing disqualification to protect claimants.
Actually, anon 2, I got the feeling that this lawyer was going way over the top to protect his clients, not to harm them. The story does not indicate in any way that some harm has befallen the claimants. Plenty of attorneys are difficult to deal with; this does not mean they are not protecting their clients.
And anon 1, you are always posting on this blog to gripe about ALJ salaries. Are you a jilted claimant or a jealous SSA employee? You can't pin this problem on the ALJ at all. Please don't allow your bias to cloud your judgment.
Anon 3: there is no evidence whatsoever of bias in the decision making process at SSA.
Please. Most of the SSA aTTTorneys and their high school graduate overlords have never heard of Mashaw. Or Dixon. Or Mills.
To Anon 3 from Anon 2:
I am local and know specfics re this attorney. However, I and other Oregon attorneys are bound by ethics rules that do not allow us to reveal information pertaining to specific disability claimants. Mr. B is not bound by Oregon State Bar ethical rules because he was found unfit for OSB membership. He has repeatedly violated ethics rules by failing to protect clients' (and others') personal information on his websites, and failing to meet his fiduciary responsibility to clients. Look at his websites. Try to call his phone number and see if you can reach anything but his message machine. That is the same unproductive experince his clients have if they want to try to communicate with him. He is a member of the California bar, but the California Bar is underfunded to investigate eithics complaints and has refused to pursue an action for Mr. B's activities in Oregon. SSA has had the information about his unethical treatment of clients but is glacially slow in pursuing the disqualification action mentioned in the article.
If you knew the facts, you would not be posting in his defense. I am posting annonymously, so you can take or leave my comments. I have no horse in this race, but I have had a good seat to view it.
@ anon 3,2:23 PM, June 02, 2010
DING DING DING DING
Post a Comment