Child’s Claim Granted Following Third Hearing

January 1, 2009

Author: Catherine M. Callery (Kate)| Louise M. Tarantino

Ann Biddle, Esq., Paul M. Ryther, Esq.

After three hearings, a soon to be fifteen year old will finally receive SSI.  The child applied for Supplemental Security (SSI) in 2001, alleging ADHD (Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder). Subsequent investigation revealed additional problems: Oppositional Defiant Disorder, Intermittent Explosive Disorder, Developmental Coordination Disorder, and a Learning Disability.  The claimant was denied SSI even though a significant amount of evidence was submitted at his first two hearings, including evidence of an attempt by the child to burn down his house with his family members at home.
 
Advocates at Southern Tier Legal Services (STLS), however, would not take “No” for an answer.  They appealed, and then appealed again!  Following the second Appeals Council remand, Jeff Nieznanski submitted a letter memorandum to the ALJ, along with twenty-two new exhibits.  He argued that his client had marked impairments in at least four domains:  attending and completing tasks; interacting and relating to others; caring for self; and acquiring and using information.  In response, the ALJ contacted him and offered an onset of December 2005.
 
Jeff was unwilling to accept this compromise, believing that the record contained substantial evidence of an earlier onset of disability in the file.  He wrote again to the ALJ, arguing for an April 2003 onset, which finally did the trick.  According to Jeff, the ALJ seemed persuaded in part by the fact that the claimant, with the help of STLS and the Empire Justice Center’s Jonathan Feldman, is pursuing an education law claim against the school district for its failure to classify the child as a student with a disability. The ALJ had indicated after the August 2008 hearing that the teacher questionnaires did not support an onset date earlier than December 2005.  Jeff used the concurrent education law claim as leverage to demonstrate that the less than compelling evidence from the school was tainted by the district’s failure to properly assess and place the child.
 
Kudos to Jeff and the other advocates at STLS who persevered to get their client and his family the    benefits they deserve.