Legal News

General Info, Legal News

Nationwide Practice

The attorneys at Greeman Toomey represent Social Security disability claimants across the United States of America. In June 2012 alone, we represented clients at hearings in 15 states: Arizona, California, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Texas, and Wisconsin, and across our home state of Minnesota. Nationwide representation means that many of our attorneys are working from the road for days at a time, which would never be possible without the organization and support of our dedicated Minneapolis-based staff. Nationwide representation also means that Greeman Toomey’s attorneys are knowledgeable about nuances between different Federal circuits. Did you know, for example, that a prior decision by an Administrative Law Judge has a different legal effect in the 6th Circuit than in the 9th Circuit? In the 6th Circuit, the cases of Drummond v. Commissioner of Social Security, 126 F.3d 837 (6th Cir. 1997) (http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/rulings/ar/06/AR98-04-ar-06.html and Dennard v. Secretary of Health and Human Services, 907 F.2d 598 (6th Cir. 1990) (http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/rulings/ar/06/AR98-03-ar-06.html) have been accepted as Social Security Acquiescence Rulings 98-4(6) and 98-3(6). In the 9th Circuit, however, the legal effect of a prior Administrative Law Judge decision is governed by Acquiescence Ruling 97-4(9), Chavez v. Bowen, 844 F.2d 691 (9th Cir. 1988) (http://www.ssa.gov/OP_Home/rulings/ar/09/AR97-04-ar-09.html). This is just one example of a legal difference that stems from the geography of your case. If you have already been denied by an Administrative Law Judge and are looking for representation for a new Social Security claim, make sure your representative knows how to help! For attorneys with the competence to examine your case from every angle and fight for your benefits nation-wide, call Greeman Toomey.

Legal News

Affordable Care Act Ruling Good News for Our Clients

Today the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act colloquially known as “Obamacare.”  For the vast majority of our clients, the most important result of today’s ruling is the broad expansion of Medicaid, the joint federal-state insurance program for people with low incomes.  The Affordable Care Act expands insurance coverage to an estimated 17 million people over the next 10 years.  Specifically, the Affordable Care Act expands Medicaid coverage to people with less than 133% of the federal poverty level ($14,856 in 2012.)  This will have the greatest impact on single adults without children, as those with children are typically already eligible for coverage under most states’ requirements. While the decision found it unconstitutional for the federal government to punish states who declined to offer the expansion of  Medicaid to its residents, it also acknowledge that as a practical matter, most states will likely accept the federal funds and offer coverage to its poor and uninsured.  This is good news for our clients.  Every day our office talks to seriously ill people without access to healthcare insurance.  The problem seems to be particularly acute in Wisconsin, where drastic austerity measures have left hundreds of thousands of state residents would access to vital healthcare services.  Two examples come immediately to mind: An epileptic women who has been turned away from her neurologists’ office because she could no longer pay hundreds of dollars out-of-pocket for the routine visits required for continued prescription of anti-seizure medications.  Now, she has seizures requiring emergency room care and hospitalizations multiple times per month. The seizures may be causing permanent, long-term brain damage, but she does not qualify for insurance and is too sick to work. A woman with extraordinarily painful diabetic neuropathy in her feet, who is on the waitlist for coverage but who presently has to be carried around because she cannot put any weight on her feet. Her diabetes had been controlled with insulin before she lost her health insurance coverage. Millions of other Americans are in similarly dire straights. Under the Affordable Care Act, if states allow the federal government to fund expansion of Medicaid coverage, our clients will at least be able to see a doctor and receive treatment for their conditions while they’re waiting in line for a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge – great news, since according to recent congressional testimony, the average wait time is 340 days.  The decision is also great news for the judges hearing Social Security cases, since their decisions are largely made based upon objective medical evidence.  Once the Affordable Care Act is fully implemented, the courts will have better documentation of our clients’ physical and mental health impairments.

Legal News

SSD Trust Fund Depleted by 2016

Here’s a recent Washington Post article about the projected depletion of the Social Security disability trust fund by 2016.  According to the article, the aging baby boomer population and the country’s economic troubles have placed increased strain on the program over last several years – applications have risen more than 30 percent since 2007.   If the program runs through its reserve incoming payroll-tax revenue will only cover 79 percent of the benefits.  And, since the program is barred from running a deficit, benefits would then be cut to match revenue.   According to the article, this fast-approaching depletion has yet to inspire a concerted effort by lawmakers to find a solution.  

Legal News

Intellectually Disabled Men Successfully Sue the Social Security Administration

According to a recent article in the San Francisco Chronicle, the San Francisco office of the Social Security Administration has been ordered by a federal judge to accommodate the needs of two men with learning disabilities, schizophrenia, and autism.  The men were wrongfully denied their benefits because they were unable to understand the complex Social Security rules and regulations. While the legal settlement only applies to the two men who sued the agency, it might have far-reaching implications for other Social Security Offices that routinely deal with mentally ill and intellectually disabled clients without offering any accommodations.

Legal News

Judge with Favorable Approval Rating Placed on Administrative Leave

Check out this recent Wall Street Journal article about Administrative Law Judge Gerald Krafsur. Judge Krafsur has been a Social Security judge in Kingsport, Tennesse since 1991.  According to the article, he was one of the most productive judges among the roughly 1500 Social Security judges nationwide, and had one of the highest approval ratings.  (You can find statistics of the approval ratings from all judges here.) He also, according the article, took the initiative to ask applications about symptoms indicative of psychiatric impairments, including Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Apparently, inquiring about impairments and approving applications is suspicious judicial behavior.

General Info, Legal News

Disability Benefits for Former Active-Duty Military Service Members

As noted in a recent Associated Press article, returning veterans from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are among the medically and mentally troubled veterans ever seen. The statistics are staggering: nearly 45 percent of Iraq and Afghan veterans have applied for service-related disability benefits through the Veterans Administration. Many wounded warriors are unaware that they may dually qualify for both VA benefits and Social Security Disability Benefits if the injuries they sustained as a part of their service render them unable to work for a period of 12 months of more. In addition, the Social Security Administration provides special expedited processing for military applicants who was on active duty at the time they became disabled, so long as the disability began on or after October 1, 2001. Greeman Toomey works with many current and former members of the military, both as a routine part of our practice and as volunteer attorneys through the free legal clinic sponsored by the Minnesota Assistance Council for Veterans. If you are a military veteran with a service connected disability that prevents you from working, we want to hear your story. Call us for a free initial consultation at 1-877-332-3252.

Legal News, Uncategorized

"Disability Insurance Causes Pain"

A recent New York Times article, “Disability Insurance Causes Pain,” categorizes Social Security disability as an unnecessary drain on our national economy. According to the article, “[d]isability insurance takes too many workers out of the job market prematurely. It reduces their lifetime income and…slows economic growth.” The article’s author, Eduardo Porter, attributes some of the notable growth in the disability program in recent years to changes in demography – an aging population and more women in the workforce. But he identifies two other factors as the major causes of the seemingly exponential increase: First, a job market that is tough to navigate for low skill workers; and, second, a basic flaw in the disability program that discourages workers from ever working again. The article states that the disability system can be fixed by “providing incentives to enable disabled workers to continue working if they can.” Mr. Porter proposes two incentives previously suggested by MIT professors: Requiring employers to buy private insurance and increasing their premiums as more of their former workers draw benefits; and allowing workers to apply for benefits while still working. Both of these proposals warrant discussion, however, Mr. Porter completely fails to acknowledge two ways in which the disability program already incentivizes work. First, Social Security allows for unsuccessful work attempts. During such an attempt a claimant increases their earned income to over $1,010.00 gross per month by either working more hours at an existing job or taking a new job. If the job lasts longer than 3 months, the claimant is deemed to have found substantial gainful employment and is no longer entitled to or eligible for benefits. However, if a claimant works for less than 3 months and finds their medical conditions prevent them from continuing that claimant may cut their hours or stop working without any change in disability benefits or eligibility (if a claimant has been working with accommodations from an employer, this period could be extended to 6 months). Second, Social Security allows for trial work periods, during which a beneficiary receiving Social Security disability benefits may test his or her ability to work and still be considered disabled. Social security does not consider services performed during the trial work period as showing disability has ended until services have been performed in at least 9 months (not necessarily consecutive) in a rolling 60-month period. In 2012, any month in which earnings exceed $720 is considered a month of services for an individual’s trial work period. Discussing new ways to incentivize work by disabled individuals can be beneficial – even necessary, since the disability fund will be exhausted by 2016 and continued benefits will have to be drawn from payroll taxes. But the slow economic recovery, increased cost of healthcare, aging workforce, and quickly dwindling entitlement funds should not be blamed on those bearing the brunt of these realities. Most people on disability would much prefer to work – they did not choose to leave the job market prematurely or reduce their lifetime income. The disability program creates an obligation to provide financial and medical assistance for those who can no longer support themselves. If we as a country are no longer able or willing to satisfy this obligation, let’s at least refrain from casting a negative light on those we promised to help by insinuating they are not motivated to work.  

Scroll to Top