We’re working on an appeal of another attorney’s client’s case that was lost at a Social Security Adminsitration Administrative Law Judge hearing. In reviewing the twelve page decision, we find the judge wrote the following (the typos are ALL his):
“Rather, when examined by Dr. Miguel xxxx, a psychiatrist at the request of the office of Dislikable Dtermiatnos, the claim was fully oriented and his speech was coherent and relevant. While he seemed anxious, he was attentive and denied any suicidal intention so r ideas. He also denied any homicidal ideas. There w err no signs of hallcuiotnsm delusions, bizarre behavior and his cognitive function was age aprpruioatpe. HTer ewe rno signs of hyperactive or attendtion difficulties. he knew the date, his socials ruvity number and his abstract thinking was intact. (Exhibit 9).”
Where to start. The Office of Disability Determinations, labeled not-so-inaccurately as the “office of Dislikable Dtermaitnos” is not even called that any more. And on, and on. It will make funny reading for the Appeals Council at least while we win this man’s case.