More than four hundred years ago, William Shakespeare wrote of the laws delay, the insolence of office. (Hamlet, Act 3, Scene I). While most Social Security Administrative Law Judges attempt to follow the rules when they decide disability claims, some judges are clearly biased against claims and often deny them regardless of the rules. A disabled claimant who endures privation and waits over a year for a hearing, and then has to go before one of those judges, often feels that they are the victim of a cruel joke. This happens much too frequently, but once in awhile there is good news. On October 18, 2013 a federal court judge approved a class action lawsuit settlement in Padro v. Astrue, in which the plaintiffs had alleged that five Administrative Law Judges from the Queens, New York office (yes, that is correct, five judges in the same office) routinely denied claims for legally insufficient reasons. The lawsuit said that the miscarriages of justice were so severe that the judges should be fired. In the settlement, Social Security agreed to give its judges more training, it issued a ruling with procedures for complaints of Administrative Law Judge bias or misconduct, and it will allow the people who were denied by one of those five judges to request a new hearing ... before a different judge. empirejustice.org/issue-areas/disability-benefits/misc-ssi-ssd-issues/alj-bias/settlement-of-alj-bias-class.html#.UumtLni9LCQ
Posted on: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 02:05:57 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015