Man is the only animal who has more than one side on his mouth, and the lawyer is a special species of the animal who, unlike the limitation of the cat who only has nine lives, possesses an infinite number of geometric sides of a mouth. Lawyers make concurrent and conflicting arguments all the time, but as long as the arguments are bifurcated and the issues kept separate and do not directly conflict or contradict, there is certainly nothing wrong with that.
In a Federal Disability Retirement case, if a Federal or Postal employee wants to pursue a collateral issue in another forum while concomitantly filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits, there is normally no conflict or problem which arises. But in the limited instance where a Federal or Postal employee is attempting to reverse a termination and regain a position, at some point in the process the two issues may come to a direct conflict.
Normally, however, the issue involves merely changing the underlying reasons which the Agency proposed for the termination, and it is a legitimate argument to litigate with the Agency to change the terms of the termination.
Robert R. McGill, Esquire