Few disciplines and classes of artisans create their own tools. Musicians do not fashion their own instruments; accountants do not produce calculators or computers; painters do not manufacture their own brushes. The blacksmith does, however, form and mold his own ironworks.
Similarly, the lawyer formulates the tools upon which he crafts his arguments; for, as most Judges are lawyers themselves, and the vast majority of legislators are also attorneys, so the statutes which are issued, and the judicial opinions which are rendered, are analogously “created” by those who are members of the class identified as “lawyers”. Once created, it is how the tools are used which makes all the difference.
In Federal Disability Retirement law, the multiple tools available must be utilized for the very purpose of their making. Thus, application of the Bruner Presumption must be invoked where appropriate, and “stretched” to their logical extension wherever possible; the “Trevan” rule concerning SSDI approvals should be pointed out whenever it has been approved during the process of waiting for a decision on a Federal Disability Retirement application; and the restatement of the applicable legal criteria in Henderson v. OPM should be emphasized when OPM attempts to misinterpret the applicable statutory criteria in being eligible for Federal Disability Retirement as requiring a 1-to-1 ratio between medical conditions and positional duties; and multiple other legal tools.
The issue of “where” a tool was manufactured, unless poorly constructed, is rarely one of importance or relevance; rather, it is how the tool is applied which is the issue of greater import and significance. For it is precisely the “how” and the efficacy of the utilization of a tool which results in the intended consequences of such use.
For the blacksmith, a well-fitting horseshoe; for the accountant, a tax savings; for the artist, a masterpiece; for the lawyer, a victory.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: The Job of a Federal Disability Attorney | Tagged: accepting opm disability clients all across america, aggressive attorney helping postal employees with personal injuries cases, applicable court decisions in federal disability retirement cases, case law citation in federal disabilities cases, citing legal precedents in opm disability law, CSRS disability retirement federal attorney, experience in handling disability retirement cases for federal employees, federal disability retirement case-laws, federal disability retirement tools, FERS disability retirement, Henderson v OPM 109 MSPR 529 (2008), interpretation of case laws in cases of disability retirement for federal employees, knowing federal disability law but being careful with overquoting case laws, law firm representing clients in opm disability law all across america, lawyers for help with opm cases, learning from past successful legal arguments on opm disability cases, legal assistance in cases of federal disability retirement for federal employees, legal tools you can use to get your federal disability application approved, many times attorneys will have to use other court decisions to secure a client's disability application, medical 'tools' you may use in your usps disability application, OPM 109 MSPR 529 2008 HendersonOPM, opm case-law decisions, opm disability case-law rule about social security disability, OPM disability retirement, owcp disability retirement, persuasive tools that can help you to make your fers disability claim stronger, postal service disability retirement, questions and answers about prior decisions by federal disability retirement judges, quoting case laws in federal disability retirement claims, quoting judge-made opm law decisions, statutory criteria and other case law used to get a fers disability application approved, submitting only the most relevant documentation, tools a disabled federal employee can use to prove his or her case, using judicial decisions in your opm disability retirement application, USPS disability retirement, what other tools I can use to prove federal disability retirement eligibility? | Leave a comment »