I am hearing that beginning next Monday, Social Security will no longer notify a claimant or their attorney of the identity of the Administrative Law Judge who will hear the case until the day of the hearing.
Well, that's just about the most ridiculous thing I've heard all day. There goes any hope of tailoring a case and its theory to the particular musings of the ALJ assigned. As if things weren't looking dire enough...
We were provided the same information from a hearing office manager last month, but I was hoping it wasn't true. Definitely is going to make preparing for hearings much more difficult and costly. I feel for my client's that are not going to be as well prepared for the specific ALJ that will be hearing their claim.
this is interesting if it comes to pass. I know the agency has become increasingly concerned with declines of video hearings when scheduled of NHC judges with low approval rates. There would still be a number of ways to get around this I would think at least with local judges. Most judges have a pretty set pattern of days and times for hearings that a resourceful rep can figure out to narrow down the list of potential "suspects." Our local office still calls ahead to schedule cases and particular assistants work for particular judges so it wouldn't take long to figure it out that way as well
So what--claimants don't know ahead of time who the claims rep is that will take their claim, and they never know which disability examiner in dds will decide the case. Who cares who the alj will be as long as you have a valid, well-developed and well-documented case? I know there have been crazy judges who deny everybody, but they are a minority and even if you know ahead of time they'll still screw you.
It's about time. The judge shopping and cozying up to certain judges, in part, is what has led up to the scandal in West VA. If it is a valid claim it should be paid.
maybe reps should waste less time trying to scam their way into getting a judge known to be more loose with the purse strings, and spend more time actually reviewing their claimant's file to see whether they should even be trying to get disability.......
A FOIA request for every case that comes up for a hearing? If you can't adequately represent a SSA claimant before an ALJ whose identity you don't know, how do you prepare your briefs and frame your appeals when you are before a federal circuit court, where the identities of the judges on the panel are similarly not disclosed until the last minute to avoid panel shopping?
I've met a lot of lazy representatives who ALJ shop. I've not met any whose advocacy in a hearing is substantially different from one judge to another. Based on my experience, I'm having a hard time imagining that any reps actually burn the midnight oil crafting ALJ-specific arguments and that legitimate advocacy is adversely affected by this policy.
Ridiculous. Different ALJ's in our hearing office have different prehearing requirements, such as whether they require a prehearing brief and what format they want it in. Our Chief ALJ specifically told us to format our submissions to the preferences of particular ALJ's.
Also, why would the FOIA be delayed that long? No reason such a simple piece of information would take more than a few days to return.
As to stopping the publication of ALJ names and numbers, that didn't begin as a Social Security project, they were FOIA'ed by a newspaper in Oregon, two years later the Administration started publishing them on their website. (There could have been earlier publications of which I'm not aware).
I'm curious as to how one "judge shops" or "scams" one's way into appearing before a particular judge. You request a hearing, a hearing gets scheduled by ODAR, at what point does a rep control the scheduling, or have contact with the scheduler??
Well, at least the comments by representatives in this thread affirm my long held theory that at the ODAR level, that personal bias of ALJ's is as important or more important than the merits of the case. Perhaps the DDS decisions are the more technically accurate ones.
It's not about bias at all. it's about preparing adequately the case you will present: some judges allow witnesses, others do not; some require pre-hearing briefs, others want oral opening or closing statements only.
Each judge has her own set of preferences/rules which any rep who PREPARES ahead of time best heed.
I'm not saying there are not "outliers". But just as there are judges who are "easy" there are judges who are quick to deny a claim. One's approach to a case is very dependent on who is hearing it
There is a point being missed here---with the onset of video service delivery(VSD) terminals, anyone from anywhere could do an interview, whether an initial claim in FO or a hearing. Things may reach a point where they grab a warm body from anywhere to conduct the interview/hearing, so wanting to know ahead of time who will do it would become irrelevant. It is another potential indicator of how much inadequate resources will be affecting everyone connected to SSA business.
This has already beeng happing in quite a few ODARs, some for many months now. Tucson, Fargo, Chattanooga, Dover, and Memphis are just some of the ODARs that stopped telling us which ALJ was assigned when they called to schedule a hearing. When asked, we were told, "I am not allowed to tell you which ALJ is handling this case. You have to wait for the Notice of Hearing."
Someone rasied a good point earlier about ALJ specific pre-hearing requirements. I cannot imagine the ALJ corps will be happy about this development if it means that those who require pre-hearing memos are not routinely receiving them are they were accustomed to.
There is a HUGE difference in waiting for a notice of hearing to find out what judge you get, as compared to walking into a hearing and just then know that you got Judge Dredd. Now I can prepare my case ten different ways, and then use the one strategy that fits the judge. My new strategy:
1. Walk into hearing, see ALJ X. 2. Promptly withdraw. 3. Tell client to tell ALJ that he wants an attorney. 4. Case gets adjourned, 5. You get rehired, and now you know who the judge is.
The wheels of justice grind to a halt just so you can adequately prepare a case for any particular judge.
404.1740. Rules of conduct and standards of responsibility for representatives.
(c) Prohibited actions. A representative shall not:
* * *
(4) Through his or her own actions or omissions, unreasonably delay or cause to be delayed, without good cause (see § 404.911(b)), the processing of a claim at any stage of the administrative decisionmaking process;
* * *
(7) Engage in actions or behavior prejudicial to the fair and orderly conduct of administrative proceedings, including but not limited to:
(i) Repeated absences from or persistent tardiness at scheduled proceedings without good cause (see § 404.911(b));
(ii) Willful behavior which has the effect of improperly disrupting proceedings or obstructing the adjudicative process; and
Well, that's just about the most ridiculous thing I've heard all day. There goes any hope of tailoring a case and its theory to the particular musings of the ALJ assigned. As if things weren't looking dire enough...
ReplyDeleteWe were provided the same information from a hearing office manager last month, but I was hoping it wasn't true. Definitely is going to make preparing for hearings much more difficult and costly. I feel for my client's that are not going to be as well prepared for the specific ALJ that will be hearing their claim.
ReplyDeleteIf that happens, our company plans on sending FOIA requests for each case that is coming up for a hearing.
ReplyDeletethis is interesting if it comes to pass. I know the agency has become increasingly concerned with declines of video hearings when scheduled of NHC judges with low approval rates. There would still be a number of ways to get around this I would think at least with local judges. Most judges have a pretty set pattern of days and times for hearings that a resourceful rep can figure out to narrow down the list of potential "suspects." Our local office still calls ahead to schedule cases and particular assistants work for particular judges so it wouldn't take long to figure it out that way as well
ReplyDeleteSo what--claimants don't know ahead of time who the claims rep is that will take their claim, and they never know which disability examiner in dds will decide the case. Who cares who the alj will be as long as you have a valid, well-developed and well-documented case? I know there have been crazy judges who deny everybody, but they are a minority and even if you know ahead of time they'll still screw you.
ReplyDeleteIt's about time. The judge shopping and cozying up to certain judges, in part, is what has led up to the scandal in West VA. If it is a valid claim it should be paid.
ReplyDelete@ 7:39 ..exactly.
ReplyDeletemaybe reps should waste less time trying to scam their way into getting a judge known to be more loose with the purse strings, and spend more time actually reviewing their claimant's file to see whether they should even be trying to get disability.......
You can view the fiscal year end stats for all the Judges at www.ssdfacts.com/fye
ReplyDeleteA FOIA request for every case that comes up for a hearing? If you can't adequately represent a SSA claimant before an ALJ whose identity you don't know, how do you prepare your briefs and frame your appeals when you are before a federal circuit court, where the identities of the judges on the panel are similarly not disclosed until the last minute to avoid panel shopping?
ReplyDeleteI've met a lot of lazy representatives who ALJ shop. I've not met any whose advocacy in a hearing is substantially different from one judge to another. Based on my experience, I'm having a hard time imagining that any reps actually burn the midnight oil crafting ALJ-specific arguments and that legitimate advocacy is adversely affected by this policy.
@5:44 the hearing will long be over before they respond to your FOIA request. Get over it.
ReplyDeleteThere is WAY too much venue shopping going on right now. This is a good first step. Glad the Agency is finally stepping up to do the right thing.
ReplyDeleteOf course the Agency could quit posting the names, numbers and types of dispositions to the public??
ReplyDeleteRidiculous. Different ALJ's in our hearing office have different prehearing requirements, such as whether they require a prehearing brief and what format they want it in. Our Chief ALJ specifically told us to format our submissions to the preferences of particular ALJ's.
ReplyDeleteAlso, why would the FOIA be delayed that long? No reason such a simple piece of information would take more than a few days to return.
ReplyDeleteAs to stopping the publication of ALJ names and numbers, that didn't begin as a Social Security project, they were FOIA'ed by a newspaper in Oregon, two years later the Administration started publishing them on their website. (There could have been earlier publications of which I'm not aware).
I'm curious as to how one "judge shops" or "scams" one's way into appearing before a particular judge. You request a hearing, a hearing gets scheduled by ODAR, at what point does a rep control the scheduling, or have contact with the scheduler??
ReplyDeleteWell, at least the comments by representatives in this thread affirm my long held theory that at the ODAR level, that personal bias of ALJ's is as important or more important than the merits of the case. Perhaps the DDS decisions are the more technically accurate ones.
ReplyDeleteIt's not about bias at all. it's about preparing adequately the case you will present: some judges allow witnesses, others do not; some require pre-hearing briefs, others want oral opening or closing statements only.
ReplyDeleteEach judge has her own set of preferences/rules which any rep who PREPARES ahead of time best heed.
I'm not saying there are not "outliers". But just as there are judges who are "easy" there are judges who are quick to deny a claim. One's approach to a case is very dependent on who is hearing it
There is a point being missed here---with the onset of video service delivery(VSD) terminals, anyone from anywhere could do an interview, whether an initial claim in FO or a hearing. Things may reach a point where they grab a warm body from anywhere to conduct the interview/hearing, so wanting to know ahead of time who will do it would become irrelevant.
ReplyDeleteIt is another potential indicator of how much inadequate resources will be affecting everyone connected to SSA business.
Just confirmed by my local ODAR this is going to happen.
ReplyDelete@8:50- you are 100% correct.
This has already beeng happing in quite a few ODARs, some for many months now. Tucson, Fargo, Chattanooga, Dover, and Memphis are just some of the ODARs that stopped telling us which ALJ was assigned when they called to schedule a hearing. When asked, we were told, "I am not allowed to tell you which ALJ is handling this case. You have to wait for the Notice of Hearing."
ReplyDeleteSomeone rasied a good point earlier about ALJ specific pre-hearing requirements. I cannot imagine the ALJ corps will be happy about this development if it means that those who require pre-hearing memos are not routinely receiving them are they were accustomed to.
There is a HUGE difference in waiting for a notice of hearing to find out what judge you get, as compared to walking into a hearing and just then know that you got Judge Dredd.
ReplyDeleteNow I can prepare my case ten different ways, and then use the one strategy that fits the judge.
My new strategy:
1. Walk into hearing, see ALJ X.
2. Promptly withdraw.
3. Tell client to tell ALJ that he wants an attorney.
4. Case gets adjourned,
5. You get rehired, and now you know who the judge is.
The wheels of justice grind to a halt just so you can adequately prepare a case for any particular judge.
Anonymous 5:06 PM:
ReplyDeleteYour strategy should have a 6th step:
6. Defending yourself against a charge under:
404.1740. Rules of conduct and standards of responsibility for representatives.
(c) Prohibited actions. A representative shall not:
* * *
(4) Through his or her own actions or omissions, unreasonably delay or cause to be delayed, without good cause (see § 404.911(b)), the processing of a claim at any stage of the administrative decisionmaking process;
* * *
(7) Engage in actions or behavior prejudicial to the fair and orderly conduct of administrative proceedings, including but not limited to:
(i) Repeated absences from or persistent tardiness at scheduled proceedings without good cause (see § 404.911(b));
(ii) Willful behavior which has the effect of improperly disrupting proceedings or obstructing the adjudicative process; and
* * *