The difference between “telling” and “showing” is a distinction which is often made in distinguishing between bad literary writing and good literature; such a distinction is applicable in practicing effective law, also.
In preparing, formulating and filing a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS, it is important to meet the burden of proof in order to show the Office of Personnel Management that one is entitled to Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS. To “meet the burden of proof” is to show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that one has met all of the legal criteria for such eligibility (e.g., that one has a medical condition; that the medical condition prevents one from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s job; that certain identified elements of the job cannot be accommodated, etc.).
The key is that one must “show”, and not merely tell, and that is where the distinction between effective and ineffective formulation of a Federal Disability Retirement application presents itself. To merely assert that “X is a fact” and then to declare that the burden of proof has been met, is an ineffective methodology of formulating one’s argument. On the other hand, to describe the factual underpinnings, then to further describe how the natural conclusion from such facts lead to the inescapable conclusion that a legal criteria has been met, is to provide for an effective argument.
The Office of Personnel Management is open to persuasion; it must merely be shown the way through descriptive analysis of the medical facts and conclusions which must be met, in meeting the legal burden of proof in a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS.
Sincerely,
Robert R. McGill, Esquire
Filed under: Burden of Proof, Clarifications of Laws or Rules, Theory and Practice: Tips and Strategies for a Successful Application | Tagged: an effective formulation of a federal disability retirement claim, apply and qualify for federal employee disability retirement, documentation required to prove disability to the office of personnel management, experienced federal disability attorney, federal disability law and legal argumentation, fers disability retirement and the burden of proof concept, from the experience of a full time federal disability retirement attorney, how does the federal employee applicant proves he is eligible for medical retirement?, law and legal definitions under opm disability law, legal & foundational argument, legal concepts in disability retirement for us federal employees, opm disability law and the preponderance of evidence concept, preponderance of the evidence documents, stating the facts versus explaining the facts in a federal disability application, the appropriate factual argumentation in your specific opm disability claim, the burden of proof concept in opm disability, the difference between mentioning and proving your disability to the opm, the theory and practice of opm disability statutory interpretation, theory and practice in opm disability law, what criteria needs to be met to prove opm disability?, what does it take to qualify for postal disability?, what kind of paperwork do I need to show I need to medically retire from the government, what medical evidence is needed for an opm claim?, what's the burden of proof under fers disability retirement law? | Leave a comment »