Judge Not!

I interviewed three potential witnesses (one sister and two brothers) to testify on behalf of their mother.

The brothers were two, hard-as-rock, heavily tattooed, cold-staring, mean-looking dudes with huge forearms and thick necks. Their tattoos were all related to death, mayhem, and chaos – no nice pretty flowers, poetic calligraphy, or cute animals.

I thought, “What can these guys say that is going to really speak to the judge? How's the judge going to see through the tattoos, if they do have something to say?”

The less-tattooed one started talking about his mother. The conviction with which he spoke of all that she had done for him, and his unblinking willingness to sacrifice everything for her was so tangible it almost brought tears to my eyes and made me wish I had such an ally like him in my life.

Then, the other, who hardly spoke a word at first, whose tattoos alone seemed to speak volumes about what must have been a hard life, started talking. He spoke just what was needed, no more, no less. We also talked about his family and his kids. Instantly, it seemed like everything good, everything of value, everything of lasting worth came pouring out of his eyes, and he had this huge, toothy, wide smile that appeared like a window to his heart. You could feel how intensely he loved his kids, you could feel the joy that you knew they brought to him. It was different from anything I'd ever experienced.

Sadly, I can't call him as a witness. All the judge will see are the tattoos. The judge won't see what I saw and felt. That's the reality of things. But I saw it, and now I know.

Loren M. Lambert © April 25, 2012

Losing (by One Minute–on a Technicality) to an Insurance Company

          My client left work due to a workers’ compensation accident that caused a hernia, and he needed an operation. He had worked for this company for 10 years and had been paying premiums for short-term and long-term disability with the Prudential Insurance Company. Prior to the accident, he had developed COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) and his doctor had told him he needed to stop full-time work or he would risk death. He wanted to keep working as long as he could.

          He underwent the hernia operation and was cleared to return to work on his normal shift, at 2 pm. On that morning he was to return, he felt significant fatigue due to his COPD, so he went to the doctor. His doctor laid down the law saying, “You are too sick to work and will die if you go.”  He decided, then, that he would not go back to work, but would file for his disability.  Did he get it?

          No. The policy was written so that had he left work when his doctor first told him to leave (due to his COPD), or had he gone to work for even one minute when he was released back to work after he had recovered from his hernia, he would have gotten his benefits.

          Do you ever hear an outcry about insurance companies winning on technicalities? No. Why? Because we are so beholden to authority that we would kiss the corporate derriere and gouge each others’ eyes out to think one or the other is getting a “step up” on us before we would realize that we, working people, have more in common than we do with our corporate overlords.

Loren M. Lambert © August 18, 2015 

Anal Judges

          The most common judicial disposition is not with the activist judge, but with the anal judge who is enamored with procedure, captivated by convention, and enchanted by complexity. Here’s an example of a paraphrased colloquy I have experienced. I will paraphrase what was said and use an example that is a little different than what happened, in deference to my client and the judge, but this is largely what was said:

          Me: Your Honor, an additional impairment the claimant has is that he’s missing his right arm from the elbow, down. This would meet one of the conditions for a finding for a listing under 12.05.

          Judge: So, where does it state that in the medical record?

          Me: Your Honor, the claimant has been homeless for many years and unable to obtain a majority of his medical records because his physician died and the records were destroyed or lost and he cannot afford to go to a doctor at this time. Besides, he can just show you his stump.

          Judge: That’s all very fine, but you need to cite me to a medical record that establishes this, as the regulations require.

          Me: Richard Jones Ph.D. does indicate, at 5F page 6 in the Medical Record, that as part of his evaluation, he noted that Claimant is missing his right arm.

          Judge: Yes, but he is a psychologist and is not qualified to opine on whether or not the claimant’s arm is impaired. All impairments must be established objectively.

          Me: Well, your Honor, I think Mr. Doe is capable of showing you this impairment. It’s pretty obvious, and we did – as allowed by the rules, and as is required under these circumstances – request he be sent for a orthopedic evaluation–

          Judge: Yes, I know. I may decide to do that, but I am not qualified to make medical conclusions, so let’s move on.

          Me: Ok, but your Honor, you can consider some medical facts that are within the common understanding of us all, and he can simply roll up–

          Judge: I said, move on. Let’s go to the psychological expert.

Loren M. Lambert © July 18, 2013