The burden is undertaken by those have little choice in the matter, but who willingly submit to the responsibility and obligation. Traditionally, the “beast of burden” (other than being a Rolling Stone song) refers to a somewhat-domesticated animal, perhaps a donkey or an ox, who must bear the weight of man’s work.
In law, the “burden” is one of proof — of the affirmative obligation to present one’s facts, persuasive argumentation based upon such facts, and the application of the relevant law which supports both the facts and the arguments. The “other side” in the litigation has no burden at all, and can simply sit and do nothing, if he or she so chooses, and see whether or not the plaintiff, the appellant or the Federal Disability Retirement applicant has submitted sufficient proof such that he or she has met his/her burden of proof.
As the weight placed upon a beast of burden is often heavy and demanding, so in a similar vein the litigant who has the burden of proof should always expect to exceed what is “necessary” in any given case. For the Federal or Postal employee who is filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, it is indeed a heavy burden to bear in order to meet the legal criteria of a Federal bureaucracy who has the unmitigated power and authority to approve or deny.
The burden of proof — it is as heavy as that which we place upon a beast of burden, and the weight of such responsibility can overwhelm us, lest we have the reserve of strength to plod onward.
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: Burden of Proof | Tagged: a process that requires proof and documentation, applicant preponderance of evidence burden in federal employees, attorney representing federal workers for disability throughout the united states, being eligible versus proving eligibility in opm disability retirement law and practice, burden of medical documentation to support a federal disability retirement case, Burden of Production, Burden of Proof, connecting legal standards and sufficiency tests, consistency of argumentation principles key to success, CSRS disability retirement, disability retirement for federal employees, documentation proof during the federal disability retirement process, expecting unrepresented claimants to bear the burden of presenting a compelling case, federal disability attorney, fers disability retirement and the burden of proof concept, higher legal standards used by the opm to deny disability retirement, how injured federal employees can be freed from carrying that heavy burden on their backs, how to prove a federal employee disability claim, if mentioning facts alone will prove the truth about your medical condition, improving chances of getting federal disability retirement, law firm representing clients in opm disability law all across america, legal argumentation and facts on the federal disability retirement application, legal arguments in the federal disability application, legal representation for injured federal workers, legal standards in opm disability retirement law, limited burden of proof shift over to OPM, logical argumentation to support key facts in your fers disability application, making rational arguments along with sound medical evidence, meeting all of the critical elements and the opm's legal burden of proof, meeting the basic requirements or actually proving my fers disability claim, meeting the burden of eligibility requirements for medical retirement under fers, opm disability retirement is a proof-based process, opm's own ''beyond reasonable doubt'' standard application, owcp disability retirement, persuasive argument in federal disability retirement claims, postal service disability retirement, proof of eligibility in federal postal disability, proving fers disability, proving you are eligible to medically retire from the federal government, proving your fers disability claim to meet the criteria, relevant facts and arguing a federal disability case, representing federal employees from any us government agency, the burden of proof concept in opm disability, the federal employee and the burden of living with a medical condition, the legal and medical persuasive impact of your opm disability claim, the not-so-obvious principle of a good opm disability application, the responsibility of proving your fers disability claim, the right approach to a possible long term federal disability process, the standard of proof, what's the burden of proof under fers disability retirement law?, writing a persuasively descriptive narrative for opm disability | Leave a Comment »