I need a lawyer who specializes in disability law. I have just filed a claim with Social Security. I have a friend who has been declared permanently disabled and is collecting benefits for a relatively minor injury, i.e a pinched nerve. I don't doubt his pain. However in light of the horror stories I have heard since I filed, I am surprised he was able to get his claim approved at all much less the first time around.
What I want to know is, what is the truth? No offense to any Attorneys hanging out on this board. But I don't want to pay an Attorney to represent me unless absolutely necessary. I called my worker back at Social Security who insisted most of her claims are approved and based on her experience my claim should go right through to approval even though it will take 90-120 days.
However, as I said above I have heard horror stories both on the web, as well as from the few Attorneys I consulted by phone (most acted like they were doing me a favor even talking to me much less representing me). Are there any Attorneys out there who will level with me as to what the truth is and, whether or not I need an Attorney.
I thank you in advance for your help. However,one last thing no offense but in light of what I have just written I am looking for an objective appraisal. Therefore, I don't want to hear "He who represents himself has a fool for a client". Thank you I eagerly, and gratefully await your response.
It might be helpful if you altered your request so that you were seeking medical not legal advice. I'll bet you wouldn't pose your positions quite so strongly. You would expect professional treatment from a doctor. It is fairlly clear that you do not have a similar expectation from lawyers.
For example, rather than expect free advice via the telephone, every doctor is going to have you come to his office. If you've not been a patient before, he or she is going to have your history taken, your insurance information (or your check and ID). Most likely they'll do a blood workup or some other tests and voila, you get a bill for his prescription.
But you resent a lawyer doing the same thing. Were I competent in the area you seek help, I wouldn't touch you as a client. You're way too smart.
post,
I want to make it clear that not all lawyers are like this. However, I have met some lawyers who are so mercenary as to lose sight of what is best for their client. They lose sight of the best interest of their client, because they are blinded by billable hours or a larger contingency. In addition,they think that because they have earned a J.D and have passed the Bar, they can treat their clients in a disrespectful manner. Now before I go any further, I have the utmost respect for anyone who has earned a JD, and has even sat for much less passed the California Bar(or any other state for that matter). However, having reached that laudable goal does not give them have the right to treat their clients and potential clients like dirt. I reiterate that not all lawyers are like this, sadly however, I have recently met several. I personally know and have worked with several Attorneys who are very client service oriented. In addition, I have completed my third year of law school(I am on leave of absence due to my disability),consequently I feel qualified to make these observations. Unfortunately, none of the Attorneys I know practice disability law,nor are they aquainted with anyone who does.
The lawyers I know have no qualms getting on the phone with a potential client and letting the client tell him in a general way what the problem is. Based on the facts derived from the conversation the Attorney will either respectfully tell the client that there is no viable cause of action, or, suggest that his services are not necessary, and refer the client to legal aide, public defender, etc whatever is appropriate or, refer the client to the appropriate specialist, or invite the client into his office for further consultation at no charge. The Attorneys I know even do their fair share of pro-bono, which as we know all lawyers are ethically(per the ABA Rules), and in some states legally required to do. Unfortunately, we also know that not all lawyers comply with that requirement.
What I was asking for was a general assesment of my facts. To tell me based on the facts presented, whether or not it is, or is not to my benefit to retain counsel. Since most lawyers offer a no charge consultation, I don't feel that it is unreasonable to ask for an honest assesment of my case on this board. Naturally, to render a final opinion the Attorney would require medical records etc. I want to make sure legal representation is absolutly essential. I also want to make it clear that I demand an Attorney that doesn't act like he or she is doing me a favor by speaking with me regarding my case.
In addition, and most importantly, I want to find out if there is any truth to the rumors I have been hearing, both on the Web, and from practicing Attorneys themselves. I want a qualified individual to either dispel the myths, or justify what I have heard.
Finally, I expect any Attorney representing me to treat me with a modicum of respect, and not in a patronizing manner as many lawyers treat their trailer trash clientele. Rod, if I offended you I apologize. I have had a bad experience trying to determine the best way to go. As fellow hobbyists I have no problem with, and have seen the rules relaxed on these boards. Especially this one. I have seen people ask for help with referals, as well as outright free advice, which, many have offered. Again, I apologize if you feel that I am out of line. I just refuse to be treated like an idiot, or in an otherwise disrespectful manner.
In conclusion, if any Attorney who specializes in Social Security Disability law would be kind enough to read my original post and please give me an objective opinion I would be gratefull. Thank You
P.S: This is an initial assesment subject to further discussion by an in office conference. I reside in the Los Angeles area.
-- Modified on 5/25/2003 12:40:40 PM
For someone who just wants to be treated "with a modicum of respect" you seem to despise most lawyers and their trailer trash clientele. Sometimes what goes around comes around.
check out www.pai-ca.org
Your SSD questions are answered there, and there are lawyers there who are paid by the state to specifically assist and deal with people like you and your "friend."
Also, remember that nothing in life is free, and lawyers are people who also need to earn a living.
-- Modified on 5/28/2003 10:21:45 AM
I agree with the other attorneys who have responded to your post, but let me add a bit. I've been in practice for a little over 20 years, most of it in a suburb of a major southeastern city. I have seen enough to know that the distinction between a cynic and a realist is that a cynic has an embittered view of human nature out of principle; a realist has an embittered view of human nature as a matter of experience. People like you confirm my "realistic" perspective on human nature.
First; trying to do something this important and complex on the cheap is like trying to cut corners on heart surgery. It's stupid. Period.
Second; the implication that an attorney who wants to be paid for his/her advice is either condescending to you or a crook is an insult. Our time and advice is our product. It is what we sell. It is what we do to make a living. NONE of us are obligated to give out free advice, especially when someone like you starts the conversation by saying most lawyers are venal if not outright crooks.
Third; the fact you begin by saying you want this advice because of a "friend's" situation tells all of us you want the same results for yourself, even if your situation is totally different from that of your "friend." Big surprise for you, Caharmon; different cases are treated differently. The facts of each case determine its outcome.
Fourth and last; if you really want an answer from a lawyer, schedule an appointment with one that practices in the field, spend a few bucks, and ask away. Do yourself a favor, though; DON'T go in the door with the "all lawyers are crooks" attitude you displayed to all of us on the board.
You sure as hell aren't getting it from me. I ask pointed questions and I expect pointed answers.
I am going to break down your comments chronologically and respond as such.
You write"A realist has an embittered view of human nature as a matter of experience". At the risk of rubbing salt into an already festering and open wound let me say this. I know personally, and know of several highly experienced attorneys who have no problem speaking to a potential client on the phone. Furthermore, they recognize the fact that this individual is a potential client, if not now than potentially in the future. Consequently, these men and women have no problem answering questions of a very, very general nature. Such as presuming he or she has time that moment, he or she will listen to a summary of the potential clients facts and advise them as to what the best course of action is followed by an invitation to come in for a free consultation. I don't know what is standard practice in your neck of the woods but in Los Angeles many, if not most attorneys offer a free consultation. All I was asking for was to find out if the stories I had heard were true,and if retaining counsel was in order now or perhaps at a later date, if at all, and yes I expect an attorney to inform me as such. It may surprise you but my personal Attorney(who unfortunatly doesn't do SS law) actally told me on one occasion to save my money, that I could handle an issue I had, by myself(long before I ever set foot on a law school campus). Whatsmore, he gave me that advice for free. Now admittedly, I have done business with him for about 20 years. But you see that's why I have done business with him for 20 years. He understands like I do,that you treat every individual that walks into your office, or calls you on the phone like gold. Yes, you may end up giving away some free advice, or in my case perform a free service or discount the sale somewhat. But as long as you treat everyone with dignity and respect, sooner or later they will come back, and then you'll make your money. These people I called, and asked in a polite and respectable manner to explain to me why I needed counsel. They treated ME like dirt not the other way around as you suggest.
Again, I am not trying to do anything on the cheap. I merely don't believe in paying for something that may not be absolutly necessary. Which brings up my friend's case. Everyone read way too much into that, way, way too much.All I was trying to do was use his case as an example of how a case can be won without the assistance of counsel, and in light of that fact, is counsel absolutely necessary? I mean use a little common sense, why pay for something that you don't need. There are people that do in fact need the assistance of counsel, and there are those that don't. Given the circumstances, all I wanted was to know if my case realistically required it. I am very well aware hoe meticulous and time consuming the practice of law is. Nevertheless, comparing the practice of Law to Medicine is totally apples and oranges.
Yes the Attorneys I spoke with were condescending, and that Counsel is a fact. I never ever expressly, or implicitly accused any attorney of being a crook. If you think that, perhaps you should see if your own house is in order. I may not be an attorney yet but I'm close, and I can guarantee you I will never treat a client the way I have been treated. You mention that none of you are obligated to give out free advice. Well perhaps you should go into the attic where your law school books are and dust off you'r "Professional Responsibility" text. Turn to the A.B.A Model Rules of Conduct. There you will find that it says that an attorney is ethically (and in some states legally), required to do a determined amount of Pro-Bono, as in FREE, each year. In addition, while I stand on my prior asertion that I never expressly, or implicitly accused any atorney of being a crook. Any attorney who advises his client that his services are needed when in fact the laymen can do it himself,is wrong. At least give the client the option. If he decides to still retain you than yes go ahead and collect your fee. Not doing so is in my opinion unethical.
I know many attorneys from major law firms like Morrison & Foerster, to small sole practicioners who do a whole lot of pro-bono. From simple advice, all the way to taking a case all the way to judgment and not take anything except expenses. No salary, no contingency, no profit, why? because it's the right thing to do. I had a professor that took a case all the way to the US Supreme Court. The Court declined to hear it but he did it out of the principal set down in the rules. It cost him $5000.00 of his own money that he will never see. Now I admit thats a bit extreme but I think you get my drift. I had another professor who has taught for free for the last 20 years. His practice is constantly so busy that he teaches for free to fulfill his pro-bono requirement.
Finally, all I ask is that you justify your fee. Convince me that I need you and I'll pay you. It's no different than any other business under the Sun.
There, I believe, I have addressed your remarks. In the future, I would sugest that you read a little closer.
P.S.: My friend, all he did was go in to Social Security, sign the forms, and he was approved, no assistance of counsel, or any other form of assistance. Unlike the horror stories I keep hearing about. You know what? you'r right, I DO want the same thing for myself. No sane individual wouldn't.
-- Modified on 6/4/2003 8:42:11 PM
-- Modified on 6/5/2003 3:19:59 PM
I have a question, why would you , Carharmon, be so "worried" after hearing " horror stories" about Social Security Claims? It seems that your original post was missing a lot of information about why you felt that way.
A generalization about "horror stories" could mean horror stories about people making false claims for all I know. And then there is also the idea about State disability. I may be outdated on what is the current policy,mainly because i havent suffered a disability recently. But I do know that in the past, based upon my experience, where I live , the proper order of events would have been to: 1. be diagonosed of such a disability. 2. to go on State disability , a temporary form of disability incase the situation does not warrant permanent disability, and 3. then the injury to be determined a permanant situation with proper medical diagnosis and documentation. 4. Then applying for Social Security.
Again I may be wrong, as i am no expert by any means. But another thought that does come to mind, is simply if this claim was legit, and proper diagnosis concurs your decision to apply, even if you are refused, then worry about the issues. I mean you are setting your self up for unnecessary stress by worrying what others have said. I dont trust what people may say as my only method of making a decision, I use my own informed mind to do so. How do you knwo the person telling theier horror story was not a loser what was trying to defraus the government for the third time by using an undefinable bogus injury.
If you have two medical opinions that warrant the need of disability and you are still refused then write to the top, if it were me I would contact the surgeon General ans ask his office how one might have success in pursuing a disability claim with two (or more) qualified medical opinions.
I dont intend on advising anyone to do anything, but I felt like commenting on what i felt was a lack of information on your part. It seems like your point was to bash would be representation for your denied claim. Because why would anyone not actually go slightly into their situation if they are taking the time to post questions wanting information.
Another issue that i wish to express an opinion on is , why did you spend so much time on what an attorney charges and a bunch of hot air about your opinion of what an attorney should or should charge for or consider pro bono. If there are a number of attorneys who will do such a consultation as you indicated, for free then why on earth didnt you just call one of them ?
In my opinion you probably did and probably didnt like what they told you about the chances of you successfulness in the case . Again this is only based on what i felt after reading your post and also because you made nothing but general comments while asking about a personal situation. I dont mean to offend but I think its a no brainer to simpl apply for the benefit and THEN worry if your claim is declined. Besides no matter what you do , you still have to actually apply for the benefit to begin the process dont you . So saying that you are worried about doing so doesnt make any sense to me. why on earth would you need an attorney to just apply?? I could see asking questions after denial , but until them why would it have occured to you you might be declined. Oh and by the way including the "horror stories" might have made it simpler to adress your question for anyone reading this.
no offense intended.