What are the different examples of things that I look for whenever I’m evaluating cases?
The first is if you are over 50, and never had any work that you did that was sedentary in the past whenever you apply for Social Security disability, if you are over 50, the SSA treats you just way way better than if you are under 50 years old, the rules are more lacks towards 50-year-olds, that people that are 50, and up getting social security disability. And even beyond the rules, I think they’re just given more credibility than somebody in their 20s or 30s, or even 40s by judges whenever they’re considering their cases.
The second thing that I look for when evaluating what might be a good Social Security Disability case, is someone that’s getting consistent medical treatment, social security disability cases are granted, primarily based on the contents of a person’s medical file. And if a person’s not getting regular treatment, then there’s nothing for a disability judge to base their decision on to grant a case. And so if a person is getting continuous medical treatment, that’s a good sign that your disability case might get granted.
The third thing that I look at when evaluating Social Security disability cases is whether or not that person has a strong work history prior to applying for social security disability, the question of whether or not a person is disabled is, Can this person go back and work a job on a full time gainful basis? If they don’t have a work history, and they say that they just started applying for disability because their medical condition got worse. That’s not as strong a credibility sinse to a judge as I was working this job for the last 20 years, I got this new medical diagnosis or I had this physical injury, or I had this surgical procedure and I was no longer able to do my job after that has taken a lot more credibly by disability judges than a person without a work history. .