Listen Up: Here Are Five Reasons Judges
Approve Social Security Disability Claims
by Scott Davis, Esq.
The majority of individuals
applying for Social Security disability have to appear before a
judge to win their case; therefore, it is critical to understand how
judges think and why they approve claims.
But if you’ve never appeared
before a Social Security judge, how would you know how they think?
One way is to spend time with them.
During my career as a Social
Security Disability attorney I have appeared and won cases before
over 300 judges in over 40 states. More important is the fact
that whether the judge is in Phoenix, Tucson, Las Vegas, or Reno, my
firm has consistently won difficult cases at a significantly higher
rate than the average claimant.
This experience has provided a
unique understanding of how judges think, the evidence they find
persuasive and why claims are approved.
There is no “one size fits
all,” but the following evidence either singularly, or in
combination, is what almost every Social Security judge must resolve
in your favor before approving a claim.
My experience confirms social
security disability claims are approved because of these reasons.
Thus, I suggest you try to incorporate some or all of the following
reasons why judges approve claims in preparing your disability case.
Reason #1: The judge finds you have a solid work
record
Credibility is the central
component of your case.
Judges base credibility
determinations on work history, medical records, physicians’
opinions regarding work, and to a lesser extent, what attempts if
any, you’ve made to return to work.
Work history is
important…indeed, one judge told me it is the first thing he
reviews. A judge is not concerned with how much you made, but
whether you have consistently worked and paid social security
taxes.
If you have a solid work
history, the judge will usually find your story credible. If you do
not, your claim is not automatically denied but a judge is more
likely to scrutinize inconsistencies in your story.
Reason #2: The judge finds
your case is well documented
I have represented clients in
countless hearings where it was clear the judge decided to approve
the claim before the hearing; the hearing was a mere formality.
In fact, most disability
claims are won or lost prior to the hearing. Why? Because
proving you are disabled is the product of many months or years of
medical and vocational documentation that cannot be manufactured the
day of the hearing. I often tell people if you’re actually trying to
win the case on the day of the hearing, you’re probably in trouble.
Prior to the hearing, judges
expect your claim to be well documented with relevant medical
records, disability letters/work limitations from your physicians,
and statements from lay people who know you well. This documentation
should be obtained and submitted for review by the judge before your
hearing. The totality of this evidence should tell the judge what
they want to know before they ever see you.
Developing your case and
having a strategy to win literally years prior to the day of the
hearing is critical and a compelling reason to retain an attorney
who specializes in disability law before or soon after filing your
claim. It costs nothing to hire an attorney and you only pay a fee
from your back benefits if you win; therefore, I recommend hiring
one even before you file your claim
Reason #3: The judge finds
your medical records are
consistent with your testimony at the hearing
When your medical records
confirm your testimony at the hearing, you should win your case.
Why? Well documented medical records are the number one reason
judges approve claims.
Disability can be based on
any documented medical diagnosis that has a significant impact
on your ability to function. Judges listen to your testimony at the
hearing, but what they really want is to see the story reflected in
your medical records. Do you have a proper diagnosis? Have you
treated consistently with physicians and have you been seen by
medical specialist(s)? Have you complied with treatment
recommendations?
Do your records confirm your
testimony regarding the frequency, severity and duration of your
symptoms and why they limit your ability to function?
Are you taking medication(s)
or receiving treatment which suggests your medical condition is
serious and debilitating? Do you have significant side effects from
medications that would affect you in a work environment? Judges will
thoroughly review medical records on these issues and before
approving the claim must find the answer to most of these questions
is “yes.”
Reason #4: The judge finds
your treating physicians
support your claim and have rendered persuasive
written opinions regarding your inability to work
In a social security
disability claim, medical records are the “cake” and treating
physicians’ opinions are the “icing.”
Judges want to see that your
doctors support your disability claim and usually expect to see
written opinions in the form of narrative letters and medical source
statements prior to the hearing. It is possible to win without a
physician’s support, but it is much more difficult.
Federal law requires the judge
to carefully consider your physician’s opinion and may require the
judge to actually adopt their opinion. Thus, if the doctor believes
you are disabled and specifically states why, the judge may be bound
to accept the opinion which means you're now in the homestretch to
claim approval.
Treating physician’s opinions
must be specific and set forth physical and/or psychological
limitations you have in a work environment. In other words,
restating your diagnosis is usually not enough; the doctor needs to
explain why your medical conditions prevent you from working.
Medical records are critical
at this step because your physician’s opinion can only be adopted
and will only make sense if his or her medical records support and
document the reasons why the physician believes you are disabled.
Treating physician’s opinions
are critical to success and like medical records cannot be
manufactured on the day of the hearing, it usually takes months and
years to earn the trust and support of a doctor in a disability
claim.
Reason #5: The judge is
persuaded by other
evidence that supports your claim
Judges frequently find “other
evidence” in my clients' cases such as affidavits from co-workers,
family and friends and personnel records documenting excellent or
poor performance (and work absences) prior to the date you became
disabled to be compelling. I use this evidence (and suggest you do)
in literally every case because judges have to consider it.
This evidence corroborates and provides lay witness support for your
testimony, your physicians’ opinions and your medical records.
I
wish you the best of luck and remember…winning your case is a matter
of perseverance, preparation and executing a thoughtful strategy
that should be created many months before your hearing before a
social security administrative law judge.
Scott E. Davis is a social security and long-term disability insurance attorney in Phoenix, Arizona. Mr. Davis represents clients throughout the United States. Although Mr. Davis has experience representing clients with a broad spectrum of physical and/or psychological disorders, the majority of his disability practice is devoted to representing individuals with chronic pain and chronic fatigue disorders. In almost every case, a fee is charged only if his client obtains benefits. Mr. Davis invites your questions and inquiries regarding representation via telephone (602) 482-4300, or email: info@scottdavispc.com.
Visit his website at
www.ScottDavisPC.com.
Back to List of Articles
LEGAL DISCLAIMER:
This website is intended to convey general information only.
The information presented here should not be
construed as formal legal advice or opinion. It is not
an offer to represent you, nor is it meant to form
a lawyer/client relationship. Persons accessing this
site are encouraged to seek independent counsel for
advice regarding their individual legal
issues. Any email sent via the Internet using email
addresses listed in this web site would not be confidential and
would not create an attorney-client relationship. |