 |
| Files stored in Conn's former office |
One nagging issue with the redeterminations of disability for Eric Conn's former clients is the files that Eric Conn kept on his clients. While Conn may not have done that much development of medical records on his clients surely some fell into his lap, brought in by his clients. Did he bother to give any of this to Social Security? There had been reports that Conn had burned many files. However, recently photos and videos surfaced showing the client files still in his former offices.
A local media outlet contacted the Department of Justice concerning those files. This is an e-mail from an attorney with the Department of Justice in response to that inquiry:
A local media outlet contacted the Department of Justice concerning those files. This is an e-mail from an attorney with the Department of Justice in response to that inquiry:
Sorry for the delayed reply. It is inaccurate to report that the United States is moving forward with the redetermination process while simultaneously denying claimants access to the records needed to appropriately litigate their claims. It is also inaccurate to report that the Justice Department advised individuals that the files were destroyed. The U.S. government has not forfeited Conn’s law office yet. Those proceedings are pending before the Court. Therefore, the Justice Department does not have custody of the law office and have neither the authority to admit or deny anyone from entering the property. Moreover, the contents of the law office, including the claimant files, are not subject to forfeiture, thus, the United States does not and will not possess or have access to the claimant files. However, the Department is assisting in the process of having a receiver appointed by the Kentucky Bar Association, who has constructive possession of the files, to gain actual possession of the files, and return them to clients for their SSA redetermination hearings.By the way, it's long settled law that the files that an attorney keeps on his or her clients don't belong to the attorney but to the clients. It's the same with medical records maintained by physicians.
"It's long settled law that the files that an attorney keeps on his or her client's don't belong to the attorney but to the clients." That is not true. In Florida a case file is considered to be the property of the attorney rather than the client. Dowda and Fields, P.A. v. Cobb , 452 So.2d 1140, 1142 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)
ReplyDeleteSo are they saying that the United States is different than the us government. They say it's inaccurate to report the United States is screwing these people with redeterminations while not letting them have their records, because the u.s. government has not forfeited the offices yet. If the government would have spent a fraction of the money looking for fraud as they spent on the three days that overpaid "attorney" spent crafting that doublespeak statement than they could have caught conn a long time ago. As long a people like whoever wrote that run the government half wits like conn will keep conning them.
ReplyDeleteI'm not certain that medical records belong to the patient. While access to the information in them is supposed to be almost unfettered, I'm pretty certain the files themselves are the property of the doctor or hospital. That is why they give you copies but keep the originals. If they were truly yours then the whole request files rigamarole (including fees) that patients have to go through shouldn't exist.
ReplyDeleteI can tell you that in Louisiana medical records do NOT belong to the patient. They belong to the provider. This is exactly opposite of a legal case file, which in Louisiana is the sole property of the client and must be produced/turned over on demand and without delay.
ReplyDeleteCharles, unless something has been changed in recent years, in NC the physical records are the property of the physician, but the patient has the right to receive the information contained therein. While I attended law school a loooong time ago, I clerked for Wake Forest University's Vice President for Legal Affairs. It was a common practice for medical residents who had seen patients for several years to "steal" the files if they were going to set up a practice nearby to try to keep those patients coming to them. One of my tasks was to send an official certified letter to the new practitioner to inform him/her that if they did not return the complete file, WFU was going to file a lawsuit for its return. They always returned it.
ReplyDelete