Federal Court Recommends Reversal Of SSA Denial
Second Federal Court Reversal of Same SSA Judge
I am pleased to bring news of a Federal Court's recommendation that the denial of social security disability benefits to a young woman, suffering Fibromyalgia and other impairments, be reversed.
This is the second federal court reversal of the same SSA Judge who has twice denied the same claim.
The Federal Court considered possible bias by the SSA Judge against this claimant as a serious, constitutional matter.
|
Possible Bias of SSA Judge Against Claimant Borders on Violation of Due Process
 "This is, this is mind boggling to me. This is - I don't even see a closed (sic) case. It's mind boggling to me that this went up on Appeal and got remanded. I'm going to write a better decision this time and if there is new stuff in the medical evidence I'll decide in your favor if it shows that. I don't see any evidence whatsoever that would indicate that you're a disabled person. And that fact that you would think that you are is the thing that just blows my mind."
Such was basically the opening lecture of the SSA Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) to a young woman appearing for the second time before him on her claim for disability benefits. A SSA Judge, who for all intent and purposes, is supposed to be fair, open and unbiased toward claimant's in a system that is not supposed to be adversarial in the least.
Such open animosity by a federal SSA Judge was startling both to myself and the young woman as we appeared before this ALJ in southeast Oklahoma. We were once again appearing before the same ALJ after another Federal Court Judge had agreed with our arguments and overruled the ALJ's prior denial of the woman's claim for disability. Apparently, having his prior denial overturned by a Federal Court was not at all pleasing to this ALJ. At this second SSA hearing the ALJ was quite obvious, even before any evidence was entered or testimony was taken, that he had no intent to let this young woman win her disability claim on his watch.
At least so he thought. After once again issuing another decision once again denying her disability benefits, we once again did not hesitate to file another appeal in Federal Court, this time among other arguments, alleging direct bias of this ALJ against this particular young woman.
This time, before a different United States Federal Judge, the Federal Court once again has issued another Order recommending that the denial by this ALJ be reversed and remanded.
Directly quoting the above statement of the ALJ, the Federal Court found such a statement by the ALJ as "certainly ill-advised". While overruling the ALJ on other evidentiary matters, the Federal Court openly expressed concern that "this or any ALJ would seemingly predispose" this case and that "[s]uch conduct could border on a constitutional deprivation of due process" and is to "be avoided in the future."
Social Security proceedings are inquisitorial rather than adversarial. It is the ALJ's duty to investigate the facts and develop the arguments both for and against granting benefits. A hearing before an ALJ is not an adversary proceeding and the ALJ has an obligation to develop a full and fair record. The regulations governing social security claims dictate that "[a]n administrative law judge shall not conduct a hearing if he or she is prejudiced or partial with respect to any party or has any interest in the matter pending for decision." 20 CFR Sec. 404.940 Every disability claimant is entitled to a SSA hearing that is both full and fair.
No person appearing before a social security judge should allow themselves to be subjected to a judge who is openly prejudiced or pre-disposed in the matter pending for decision. Such conduct by a social security judge borders on a constitutional deprivation of due process for any such claimant.
|
