Disparate facts, placed in the same vicinity, aggregated in order to formulate a composite of conceptual constructs, can provide to the recipient information concerning a specific issue, resolution of a problem, perspective on a viewpoint, etc. However, when a particular issue is governed by statutory authority, history of case-law interpretation, and multiple sets of regulatory issuances from a Federal Agency — and, further, where it involves an application to prove eligibility, as opposed to merely filling out a form to ascertain entitlement — in such an instance, it is necessary to argue “the law” , as opposed to merely reciting a set of “facts”.
In preparing, formulating and filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether under FERS or CSRS, it is sometimes questionable as to the value of making complex legal arguments, especially at the initial stage of the process, and sometimes at the Second, or “Reconsideration” Stage of the process. But that is the point, isn’t it — that it is a “process“, as opposed to a singular filing event? For a process necessarily involves preparation and formulation not only for the “present”, momentary event; rather, it entails and encapsulates potential future considerations.
OPM cites “the law” right back at you in a denial letter; the Federal or Postal employee must be able to adequately respond by understanding, applying, rebutting and answering with the very laws which are referred to, implied by, or otherwise referenced in OPM’s denial. Furthermore, preemptive recitation and reference to laws governing specific issues is always an effective methodology of arguing a case. Remember: Facts alone only arbitrarily provide information; information recited without context fails to make a case; it is through logical argumentation that the persuasiveness of a set of facts can be effectively conveyed in order to win a Federal Disability Retirement case.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: Theory and Practice: Tips and Strategies for a Successful Application | Tagged: accepting opm disability clients all across america, attorney representing federal employees, blogs for disabled postal or federal employees, civil service disability, complex argumentation in federal disability applications, explaining the severity of your medical conditions is not enough in federal disability retirement, Federal Disability, federal disability law and legal argumentation, federal disability law blog, federal disability retirement, federal disability retirement attorney, FERS disability retirement, law firm representing clients in opm disability law all across america, legal & foundational argument, legal argument to support your opm medical incapacity case, legal representation for injured federal workers, making rational arguments along with sound medical evidence, mentioning facts alone are not enough to win a federal disability retirement case, nationwide representation of federal employees, OPM disability lawyer, OPM disability retirement, Postal disability, preemptive reference to laws in the early stages of the federal disability retirement application, representing federal employees from any us government agency, the applicant's legal arguments, the appropriate factual argumentation in your specific opm disability claim, the most complete blog on federal disability retirement, the need to argue law in federal disability retirement cases, the qualities of an effective legal argumentation of opm disability law, using legal argumentation in an appropriate and effective way, USPS disability retirement, when the opm cites laws against your federal disability application | Leave a comment »