Disability Attorney Notes – Importance of Careful Billing Records
The Court considers five factors in determining whether to award disability attorney fees.
1) Did the ERISA governed disability insurance plan act in bad faith? Was it guilty of forcing the claimant into Court?
2) Does the Plan or administrator of the disability plan have the ability to pay the fees if the Court awards them?
3) Would awarding the disability attorney fees act as a deterrent in the future?
4) Did the legal decision have the potential to benefit other plan members?
5) How did the relative merits of each side compare?
While the Court has the right to order the disability insurance plan to pay the disability attorney’s fees if even one of the above conditions are met, in most cases, the Court only considers the awarding of fees if more than one of the five factors applies.
First and foremost, the Court looks at whether the disability attorney succeeded in winning a substantial part of the litigation. Then the Court moves on to considering whether the disability insurance plan had a justifiable position that was taken in good faith. If it did so, the Court may determine that awarding of attorney’s fees is not appropriate.
Additional Relief For Your Social Security Disability Clients From an Employment Law Standpoint
Social Security disability attorneys or representatives are often not familiar with some of the civil rights laws and other remedies which may be available to their clients, beyond, or in lieu of, Social Security disability benefits, and which may result in additional or alternative sources of financial proceeds for their clients. Also, as Social Security disability claims have greatly increased due to the lagging economy, client advocates may encounter many persons who will not meet the stringent Social Security disability standards, but may be able to qualify for other relief. This article will explore some of these laws and remedies.
Due to the complexity of some of the remedies and the intricate interaction between them, which often require balancing and negotiation, it will be beneficial to client advocates to establish a relationship with one or more attorneys who practice in the areas of law noted below if they do not, in order to determine if other remedies may exist for their clients. As many of these additional remedies have stringent time deadlines, inquiries should be made as quickly as possible to other counsel as to whether a client has additional remedies and the viability of pursuing them. Indeed, failure of an attorney or a representative to consider these remedies may be the source of a professional liability issue depending on the outcome of a client’s case.
An applicant for Social Security disability benefits frequently has a history, such as his medical conditions or work history, which has brought him to the position of applying for this type of benefit, which requires that he is deemed unable to perform substantial gainful work for a minimum of twelve (12) months or he has a condition that will result in death. That history often involves his employment situation and the nature of that situation can serve as the basis for additional remedies. Therefore, a thorough interview with a potential client should determine:
7 Disability Attorney Lessons From a CFS Denial Disability Lawsuit
A recent case that came before a U.S. District Court reflects the fact that the Court system is beginning to hold ERISA short-term disability plans and long-term disability plans accountable for decisions to deny disability benefits to claimants with CFS when they provide all the medical evidence it is currently possible to provide with medicine’s current understanding of this mysterious syndrome. This case teaches certain lessons which any disability attorney is wise to consider.
Disability Attorney Lesson #1:
First, a disability attorney should seek any information available into the potential conflict of interest which could have existed when the plan administrator had both the power to decide who deserved disability benefits and to interpret what the plan document meant. If initial research suggests that a conflict of interest may have motivated the decision to deny benefits, a motion to compel may be filed with the Court.
Every effort should be made to demonstrate a conflict of interest, as it heightens the standard with which the Court will review the disability claimant’s claims file. Instead of the Court merely looking at the file to determine whether or not the disability plan made a reasonable decision, the Court also considers how much the conflict of interest played in the decision making process. This increases the probability that the Court will find the decision was arbitrary and capricious.
