tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post2383592773328365122..comments2024-03-29T07:01:55.138-04:00Comments on Social Security News: Yes, We Really Do Need All Those Levels Of ReviewUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-69099965590254338912012-06-04T12:59:00.658-04:002012-06-04T12:59:00.658-04:00So, the fact that even the 9th Cir. agreed that th...So, the fact that even the 9th Cir. agreed that the claimant lied for several years to various medical providers is not, in Mr. Hall's opinion, supposed to support that the claimant exaggerated his complaints at the hearing and does not serve to support the ALJ.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-90180250083579951862012-06-04T08:59:48.753-04:002012-06-04T08:59:48.753-04:00"The ALJ indicated that it was not given sign..."The ALJ indicated that it was not given significant weight..."<br /><br />I haven't read the Decision yet, but this sentence jumped out at me. Great, it was not given significant weight, but what weight was it actually given? I don't belive "Not significant weight" meets the requirment to assign and explaint the particular weight given.<br /><br />- JAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-37146583766647563822012-06-03T07:26:30.431-04:002012-06-03T07:26:30.431-04:00Troubling case:
1.) Would have been simpler IF t...Troubling case: <br />1.) Would have been simpler IF the ALJ had given a supplemental hearing -- even if on the ALJ's own motion to state on the record that he was not considering or giving very little credence to the report. There is now a hearing office in Alaska, so not even talking about another trip or video. <br />2.) Should have been set back at AC level and never defended by OGC. <br />3.) From my experience in other 'real' bcourts, the hearing office staff should have protected the ALJ from receiving the ex parte information, by just informing the ALJ that there was the information and source but asking if s/he wanted to know the content. <br />4.) The circuit judge seems to be troubled and at times seemed that the decision could have gone in either direction. There must have been discussion by the three judge panel and possible several drafts. <br />5.) At heart, the federal panel did not belive the FELON and that there was more than enough medical and other evidence to overcome any doubt or post hearing added observation. The technical distinction of "harmless error" is less convincing. If the claim had been sent back to SSA, ... the claim would be eventially denied and the panel was saving time. <br />6.) But there is also mention of mental illness, which may explain part of claimant's past difficulty getting along with society (i.e., criminal conviction), being fired as a cook, variable statements ("press 1000 pounds") and variable presentation (the exagerated limp). Mental cases are seldom easy. A different day with a different counsel and a different ALJ, there may have been a different result for even this less than likable claimant. <br />Not a simple case.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-45921864819477945322012-06-03T06:37:20.654-04:002012-06-03T06:37:20.654-04:00Prior to reading the decision, I would question th...Prior to reading the decision, I would question this act of an "FBI agent" reporting outside of official channels. <br />Most basic FBI "Special Agents" (<br />GS-13) have a police/state trooper background, increasingly accounting majors, and a scattering of night and low rated law schools. <br />Was this some kind of joint taskforce member or just SSA OIG?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-81905459656891976312012-06-01T21:29:42.656-04:002012-06-01T21:29:42.656-04:00Come on, people. The CoA found that considering t...Come on, people. The CoA found that considering the ex parte communication was error. No argument there. But the analysis doesn't stop there, thankfully. The court then went into a rather detailed analysis about whether this was harmful error. <br /><br />As you may or may not know, the 9th Circuit is the most liberal and claimant friendly court in the land. And the claimant's attorney is a relatively good one. So believe whatever you want but the claimant had every chance in the world to win this case, and still lost. The fact that there was tons of evidence already discredting him certainly made the case for SSA.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-59949309570254952612012-06-01T18:36:29.467-04:002012-06-01T18:36:29.467-04:00404.1512 (b) What we mean by “evidence.” Evidence ...404.1512 (b) What we mean by “evidence.” Evidence is ANYTHING you OR ANYONE ELSE submits to us or that we obtain that relates to your claim (emphasis added).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-30566723015209713292012-06-01T17:45:50.825-04:002012-06-01T17:45:50.825-04:00From what I've heard, most new FBI recruits ar...From what I've heard, most new FBI recruits are accountants, not lawyers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-69084855339789310802012-06-01T15:28:21.342-04:002012-06-01T15:28:21.342-04:00I hope and pray the comments offered through 3:09 ...I hope and pray the comments offered through 3:09 pm were not from sitting ALJs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-1564624126461645882012-06-01T15:09:14.509-04:002012-06-01T15:09:14.509-04:00you think this is a "travesty"? Harmles...you think this is a "travesty"? Harmless error actually sounds like the correct result. The ALJ indicated that it was not given significant weight, so how would the result change if the evidnece was simply ignored? <br /><br />BTW. Evidence is often obtained after the hearing. In fact, many attorneys wait until after the hearing to submit evidence and many ALJ's order CE's after the hearing. That evidence is then proferred to the claimant/rep. <br /><br />Here, it looks like the info was proferred and the rep didn't offer any evidence to contradict what the ALJ heard.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-38700332335474834982012-06-01T15:03:27.964-04:002012-06-01T15:03:27.964-04:00Or the one who testified he stopped smoking 6 mont...Or the one who testified he stopped smoking 6 months ago, then leaves the hearing room and goes straight to his car - and lights up? Seen by the VE and VHR who were leaving for lunch and parked right next to him (and had heard the testimony just moments before).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-7047394543993299372012-06-01T14:27:45.385-04:002012-06-01T14:27:45.385-04:00Most of the agents I have met have no prior legal ...Most of the agents I have met have no prior legal background and are not attorneys. I also would have expected the agent to report this, but certainly not to the ALJ. You submit your report to the Office of the Inspector General or the common fraud hotline.<br /><br />And unless this FBI agent had some considerable expertise to determing the condition of the claimant, it should have been given not only no weight, but no thought at all. The short examinations are hardly enough to get an accurate basis for determining a claimant's abilities, but being part of the FBI suddenly makes you capable of assessing when someone is faking a disability after having seen them for a few moments?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19246708.post-5279200130269475892012-06-01T14:11:13.571-04:002012-06-01T14:11:13.571-04:00Actually, since he is a FBI Agent, I would suspect...Actually, since he is a FBI Agent, I would suspect that he is bound by his code of ethics to report any suspected fraud just like the rest of us lawyers and Federal employees. Perhaps an ethical Rep/Atty would also report this to the Judge as full disclosure?? Instead of punishing the crooks, you want to go after the do-gooders??Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com