Welcome! This site is written for Social Security disability claimants, for their legal representatives, and for the network of people involved in the Social Security disability claim process. I hope you find it helpful.
Free Claim Review

You do not need any money to hire me to represent you before the Social Security Administration. Attorney fees for a Social Security disability or SSI claim are contingent on winning the claim. That means that you pay a fee only if you win, and when you are awarded benefits. You pay no fee if your claim is denied.

The attorney fee is 25% of the retroactive benefits awarded in your claim. This fee subject to a “cap” imposed by Social Security. The current fee cap is $6,000. So the fee is 25% of the back benefits or $6,000 – whichever is less.

Attorney fees for Social Security claims are regulated by the Social Security Administration. The SSA must approve any fee that is charged in a Social Security case. Typically, the SSA approves the fee agreement, calculates the back benefits and the fee, and pays the fee directly to the lawyer.

A fee agreement sets forth these details so that there is no misunderstanding. Both the client and I sign a fee agreement at the beginning of my representation.

My colleague Colorado Springs attorney Tomasz Stasiuk has authored a terrific response to the 11 Percent ALJ on his Colorado Social Security Disability Benefits Law blog.

Tomasz examines five of the points made by the 11 Percent ALJ, and persuasively knocks down all five. His article is a must read for anyone involved in the Social Security disability process.

{update: Georgia disability attorney Jonathan Ginsberg has published his take on the 11 Percent ALJ in his Social Security Disability Blog. Jonathan's article is titled Lack of Consistency Among Social Security Judges a Problem. Jonathan finishes his article with this intriguing thought: "In my view a judge who approves significantly fewer cases than his peers ought to be reviewed and asked to justify his performance."}

This is a good example of how legal blogging should work. One person raises an issue. Another takes the reins and adds valuable analysis. A conversation takes place, and everyone is the better for it. Hopefully there are enough of us now writing about this specialized area of law that the conversation will continue.

This is my 100th post on the Social Security Disability Lawyer. I feel this blog has come a long way from its humble beginning, and that I am just now starting to hit my stride as a legal blogger.

One unexpected bonus for me has been getting to know Social Security disability lawyers around the country through this blog, particularly those like Tomasz and Jonathan who are writing regularly about this area of law.

The publication of the ALJ database has been on my mind over the New Year's holiday weekend. It has been a unique opportunity for us Social Security disability lawyers to compare our impressions of the ALJs we see against an objective standard.

For example, I learned that a judge whom I consider to be a tough judge had the same claim allowance rate as a judge from another state whom I considered to be a more claimant-friendly judge. I am still thinking about that.

As I explored the database, I was shocked to learn that there were Social Security administrative law judges with approval rates as low as 11%. {update: This was in 2007, which is the most recent year for which complete statistics are available.}

I am very troubled by that statistic. Somewhere there is a judge, deciding hundreds of Social Security claims a year, who made fully or partially favorable decisions in just 11 claims out of a hundred. 11 out of 100! Meanwhile, the overwhelming majority of this judge's colleagues have claim approval rates somewhere well north of 50%.

So I have been thinking: what sort of a person grants just 11 claims out of a hundred? 

Continue Reading The 11 Percent ALJ

I have added a link the The Oregonian's searchable ALJ database to the sidebar of this blog. You can find it under "Resources of Note." I shall maintain the link for as long The Oregonian keeps the database available.

Knowing a judge's stats is just one factor. It is also important to know how a particular ALJ approaches a claim and how a particular ALJ conducts a hearing, because they all have different styles.

This is why, in my opinion, it is important to have a local Social Security disability lawyer who knows the judges in your state.

The latest statistics on processing times at Social Security hearing offices have been released. The Portland, Maine ODAR is now number 3 in the country, with an average processing time of just 252 days. This is a remarkable achievement. With 5 resident ALJ's and a "guest" ALJ hearing claims by videoconference for the next few months, this number may improve even further.

At the Manchester, New Hampshire hearing office the average processing time is 346 days, which is 21st  in the country. This is a substantial improvement for that office from just two months ago, when that office ranked 50th in the country with an average processing time of 418 days.

For perspective, there are 148 ODARs around the country. The bottom of the pack has processing times over 700 days.

As usual, Social Security News has the complete backlog report.

The bombshell dropped by The Oregonian newspaper has the network of Social Security disability lawyers abuzz with emails, blog posts and twitter updates. The Oregonian published a searchable database showing approval and denial rates for all the Social Security administrative law judges for the years 2005 to 2008. For those of us concentrating on this area of law, this is a big deal.

These statistics have never been available before. There have been statistics about approval and denial rates by state, but never by by individual judge. So for the first time it is possible to compare a particular judge to his or her peers. Further, the database facilitates a comparison between my personal experience with a judge with that judge's overall statistics. That is simply a gold mine of insights for me.

My first impression, after looking at the statistics for the judges in Maine and New Hampshire was surprise that the spread between judges was not greater. Among judges currently serving in these two states, the lowest denial rate was around 60% and the highest was around 80%. I was surprised that there was not a greater range between the high and the low.

Since then I have had a chance to explore the database. If you search by year rather than by judge, the database provides a list of all the ALJs making decisions that year. You can then sort that list by column. I sorted by the column showing each judge's approval rate. I was stunned to learn that there are ALJ's out there deciding hundreds of claims a year with approval rates as low as 11%.

Take a look at The Oregonian's ALJ database. And please leave a comment below telling me what you learned. Please identify the particular judge by state, not by name.

I just received an Appeals Council decision vacating an unfavorable ALJ decision and remanding the claim for a new hearing. The Appeals Council did the right thing.

This was an unusual case, because there was a obvious error in the judge's unfavorable decision. The judge's decision reasoned that, since the claimant had no records of mental health treatment for the 14 months prior to the hearing, the claimant's statements about the severity of her mental impairments were not fully credible. That is a fairly common conclusion.

The problem with the judge's decision is that I had submitted the recent mental health records. Further, I submitted the medical records via Social Security's electronic records express, so I had proof of submission of the medical records. For whatever reason, the judged overlooked those records. The Appeals Council has now vacated the decision and remanded the claim for a new hearing.

The Appeals Council offers relief for a significant number of claims. The Appeals Council review process is particularly effective when you can point to clear-cut errors (as in this case). It also helps to write a very focused Appeals Council brief.

This question brought a recent visitor to this blog: Does a medical statement from my doctor help with social security disability?

The short answer is YES! A medical source statement from your treating physician regarding your functional limitations is usually the most powerful evidence available for a Social Security disability claim.

It is not just common sense that your treating doctor knows you best. Social Security regulations (see 20 C.F.R. 404.1527(d)(2) and Social Security Ruling 96-2p) state that your doctor's opinion, in ordinary circumstances, is more important than the opinions of other doctors who may have examined you just once, or not at all.

A medical opinion from the treating doctor is so important that when I receive one, I write a handwritten note to thank the doctor for taking the time to complete the medical source statement. I actually have special stationery for this. I want to let the doctor know just how important the opinion is for the patient's disability claim, and how much the effort is appreciated. I do this because medical source statements win claims.

Thanks for clicking on the URL on my twitter page.

I am a Maine Social Security lawyer, with offices in Saco, Maine. I live in Kennebunk with my wife and daughter, and our dog Pirate.

I also maintain a legal blog, Social Security Disability Lawyer. The page you are now visiting is on the blog site. Please feel free to click around.

For more about me, you can check out my about page or visit my LinkedIn profile.

If you are a Social Security disability claimant, an attorney, or you are interested in the Social Security disability process, please read the blog.

Thank you for stopping by.