 |
| Click on page to view full size |
 |
| Click on page to view full size |
It may not be clear from this memo but many, perhaps most, of the claimants involved here weren't even Eric Conn's clients but the clients of one or more other attorneys who worked with Conn who haven't themselves been accused of misconduct.
I note the IG's letter says the claimant's were represented by Mr. Conn or his firm. I guess the Inspector General does not know that law firms cannot represent Social Security claimants. Only individual attorneys can, as our firm is repeatedly told.
ReplyDeleteI'm not understanding how they can go after other attorneys in his firm if they don't have evidence that they bribed Judge Andrus or got around the usual case rotation system as Conn did with his cases. In the testimony of the ODAR employees who reported Conn, that was the only attorney they reported.
ReplyDeleteSo, how far back is the SSA going back on this *new* batch of cases?
ReplyDeleteAccording to the OIG pages you included, these cases all involved the submission of fraudulent MSSs prepared by the doctors “employed/paid” by Conn/his firm. Even if an associate of Conn represented the claimants, they would have known the hired doctors were preparing false reports, which the associates then submitted.
ReplyDelete