FERS Disability

Last Updated on December 25, 2022 by FERS Disability Attorney

I will be writing an article of greater length on this issue, but suffice it for now that when “the law” works, it works well.  A major second case has been decided in favor of the Federal employee — first, it was Vanieken-Ryals v. OPM, 508 F.3d 1034 (Fed. Cir. 2007), and now, Sylvia M. Reilly v. OPM, decided July 15, 2009.

Vanieken-Ryals toppled the irrational imposition of a baseless standard by OPM — that there is a distinction to be made between “objective” as opposed to “subjective” evidence concerning medical evidence.  Example of the absurdity:  How do you prove the existence of pain?  While an MRI may show a physical condition, you cannot prove that such a physical condition equates to debilitating pain, leaving aside any quantification of pain.  Similarly, how do you prove the existence of Major Depression?  Anxiety?  Panic attacks?

Now, Reilly v. OPM has toppled another idol of a false standard imposed by OPM: that medical documentation which post-dates separation from Federal Service is near-irrelevant.  This has never made sense, for at least 2 reasons: first, since a person is allowed to file for Federal/Postal Disability Retirement within 1 year of being separated from service, why would medical documentation dated after the separation be considered irrelevant?  Second, medical conditions rarely appear suddenly.  Most conditions are progressive and degenerative in nature, and indeed, that is what the Court in Reilly argues.  Grant another win for the Federal employee, the law, and the process of law.  It makes being a lawyer worthwhile when “the law” works.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire