David Daugherty, who was convicted of receiving a bribe from Eric Conn, has died in prison at age 83. Daugherty had been an Administrative Law Judge.
6 comments:
Anonymous
said...
Daugherty was the unsung villain in all this. While Conn's hands were not clean by any means, everyone forgets that it was the ALJ who initiated the whole crooked scheme, by his own admission.
Because of him, I can't even postpone a hearing or send instructions to the writers without getting approval from a 28-year-old OHO group supervisor who's never practiced law. As he dies, he takes the meaning of the term "administrative law judge" with him. Good riddance.
I think it is worth pointing out that this corrupt scheme was first brought to light by two Social Security employee whistleblowers. Their names were Jennifer L. Griffith and Sarah A. Carver. We should all be grateful to those federal employees who risk their careers and well-being in order to expose corrupt officials.
Of course, when a whistleblowers' identity is known, it can lead to substantial efforts at retaliation and that is what happened in this case. Both of these whistleblowers were subjected to substantial retaliation efforts as is set out in their congressional testimony.
Additionally, one of the whistleblowers was the target of a scheme by the former HOCALJ of Judge Daughterty's hearing office. According to his guilty plea, Charlie Paul Andrus:
"According to his plea agreement, Andrus met with Conn shortly after the article was published and the two devised and implemented a plan to discredit the informant. According to court documents, the plan involved filming the informant violating a program that allowed employees to work from home, with the hope that the informant would be terminated as a result. By pleading guilty today, Andrus admitted that he was aware that the SSA employee reported truthful information to federal investigators and that he wanted to retaliate against the employee by interfering with the employee’s employment and livelihood."
I've noticed many of the newer ALJ's want to be like robots and not even exchange greetings with attorneys off the record, as though we might use our Svengali like charm to get them to accept bribes to pay cases. What these folks forget, as comment #1 above states, is that Daugherty initiated this whole scheme.
That being said, I practice in the Ohio Valley region. When this story broke, almost every judge in the area's pay rate immediately dipped by 10-20%. These two clowns are the biggest reason for the Agency's anti-claimant/anti-rep shift over the last 8 years.
I have practiced in this field since 1979 and have handled over 6,500 hearings. During that time I have had dealings with many ALJs. Some of my relationships with ALJs was rocky particularly because I appeal cases often and have success in the Appeals Council and the Federal Courts.
Over the years I have also seen a lot of those ALJs retire. When several of my rocky relationship ALJs retired they became friendly with me. I attend a lot of local sporting events. I often run into my former adversaries. I have had lunch with these guys and have sat at football games discussing the current events at ODAR or OHO.
I currently serve on a State Bar committee with a former ALJ who I had some difficult cases with. He is now complimentary of me. I was on the Platform Committee of a political party in my county. The Chairman of the Rules Committee was one of the more difficult ALJs I have dealt with. He and I have had some nice conversations and we are even friends on Facebook at his initiation.
Finally, two of the ALJs I faced were law school classmates of mine about 50 years ago. One of them is still an ALJ. I can attest that I do not get any points from him because we were classmates.
I gave a one hour lunch seminar about the Eric Conn Con in January 2019. My take on the Conn situation was that ALJs and Social Security in general were reluctant to issue on the record decisions. I have only seen two such decisions in the past seven years.
I was wondering why it had become so difficult to get on the record decisions (impossible). I make those requests very sparingly, so I was surprised that the ALJ couldn't see where the record said my client was on dialysis (though it did) and didn't act on my request. Thanks for the insight.
6 comments:
Daugherty was the unsung villain in all this. While Conn's hands were not clean by any means, everyone forgets that it was the ALJ who initiated the whole crooked scheme, by his own admission.
Because of him, I can't even postpone a hearing or send instructions to the writers without getting approval from a 28-year-old OHO group supervisor who's never practiced law. As he dies, he takes the meaning of the term "administrative law judge" with him. Good riddance.
I think it is worth pointing out that this corrupt scheme was first brought to light by two Social Security employee whistleblowers. Their names were Jennifer L. Griffith and Sarah A. Carver. We should all be grateful to those federal employees who risk their careers and well-being in order to expose corrupt officials.
Of course, when a whistleblowers' identity is known, it can lead to substantial efforts at retaliation and that is what happened in this case. Both of these whistleblowers were subjected to substantial retaliation efforts as is set out in their congressional testimony.
Congressional Testimony
Additionally, one of the whistleblowers was the target of a scheme by the former HOCALJ of Judge Daughterty's hearing office. According to his guilty plea, Charlie Paul Andrus:
"According to his plea agreement, Andrus met with Conn shortly after the article was published and the two devised and implemented a plan to discredit the informant. According to court documents, the plan involved filming the informant violating a program that allowed employees to work from home, with the hope that the informant would be terminated as a result. By pleading guilty today, Andrus admitted that he was aware that the SSA employee reported truthful information to federal investigators and that he wanted to retaliate against the employee by interfering with the employee’s employment and livelihood."
DOJ Press Release
I've noticed many of the newer ALJ's want to be like robots and not even exchange greetings with attorneys off the record, as though we might use our Svengali like charm to get them to accept bribes to pay cases. What these folks forget, as comment #1 above states, is that Daugherty initiated this whole scheme.
That being said, I practice in the Ohio Valley region. When this story broke, almost every judge in the area's pay rate immediately dipped by 10-20%. These two clowns are the biggest reason for the Agency's anti-claimant/anti-rep shift over the last 8 years.
I have practiced in this field since 1979 and have handled over 6,500 hearings. During that time I have had dealings with many ALJs. Some of my relationships with ALJs was rocky particularly because I appeal cases often and have success in the Appeals Council and the Federal Courts.
Over the years I have also seen a lot of those ALJs retire. When several of my rocky relationship ALJs retired they became friendly with me. I attend a lot of local sporting events. I often run into my former adversaries. I have had lunch with these guys and have sat at football games discussing the current events at ODAR or OHO.
I currently serve on a State Bar committee with a former ALJ who I had some difficult cases with. He is now complimentary of me. I was on the Platform Committee of a political party in my county. The Chairman of the Rules Committee was one of the more difficult ALJs I have dealt with. He and I have had some nice conversations and we are even friends on Facebook at his initiation.
Finally, two of the ALJs I faced were law school classmates of mine about 50 years ago. One of them is still an ALJ. I can attest that I do not get any points from him because we were classmates.
I gave a one hour lunch seminar about the Eric Conn Con in January 2019. My take on the Conn situation was that ALJs and Social Security in general were reluctant to issue on the record decisions. I have only seen two such decisions in the past seven years.
I was wondering why it had become so difficult to get on the record decisions (impossible). I make those requests very sparingly, so I was surprised that the ALJ couldn't see where the record said my client was on dialysis (though it did) and didn't act on my request.
Thanks for the insight.
Post a Comment