Hilary, Nathan, and oral argument – It's not what you think

Ordinarily, the mention of husband and wife in the same sentence as the term "oral argument" isn't a good thing. However, Hilary and Nathan recently showed there is an exception to this rule!

Nathan argued a big truck collision case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit on January 16 in St. Louis. In this case, the Chaney Law Firm is defending a jury verdict it won for a client in federal district court in Hot Springs in January 2012. One issue on appeal dealt with the routine use of medical visual aids based upon digitized x-rays and proton density MRIs. The other main issue on appeal was a procedural question concerning two professional defense witnesses that were excluded; the defense tried to call these new experts at the last minute because its original expert's theory of degeneration did not hold up under cross-examination. You can listen to Nathan's argument here.

Hilary argued a social security disability case before the Eighth Circuit on February 14 in Kansas City. Hilary's case involved issues of whether the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) gave the proper amount of weight to all the medical evidence. Hilary argued that the ALJ erred by only considering just five pages of medical records from just one doctor who said he didn't have enough information to fill out the disability paperwork, when hundreds of other pages of records from four other doctors showed our firm's client is truly disabled. Even the one doctor the ALJ relied upon prescribed narcotics on at least 13 different occasions, yet the ALJ found our client's pain was not severe enough to preclude work. This case truly shows why many people need legal representation when dealing with the Social Security Administration. You can listen to Hilary's argument here.

It is truly a high honor and great privilege to argue before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Below are pictures from the courtrooms in St. Louis and Kansas City. Which has the better view?

Nathan speaks to Arkadelphia High School business class

I was invited by Principal David Maxwell and instructor David Gustaveson to speak to several business classes at Arkadelphia High School this morning on the subject of intellectual property. 

I told the students a plastic Coke bottle represents 5 types of intellectual property and asked for their help in naming each one. We walked through (1) the design patent for the shape of the bottle, (2) the utility patent for the tamper-resistant top, (3) the trade secret on the Coke formula, (4) the trademark for Coca-Cola® and Coke®, and (5) the copyright for the label.

The discussion turned to the laws for intellectual property. We discussed the constitutional basis for each type of intellectual property and some basic tensions between protecting intellectual property rights and encouraging free sharing of ideas. iPhone vs. Android helped illustrate some of these principles, and the students were divided in their loyalties to their cell phones.

I appreciate the students being attentive and interactive. Thanks to Mr. G and Principal Maxwell for inviting me out! And, thanks to Paul Sivils for giving me a tour. AHS has changed quite a bit since I was a student!

UPDATE: We've added a page on the site that includes an explanation of how a Coke bottle represents five different types of intellectual property. Check it out here.

Constitutional tampering

An Arkansas legislator introduced SJR6 this week, which is bad news for ordinary Arkansans. Why? It tampers with the Arkansas Constitution. It seeks to change the system of checks and balances of our state government. We ask that you contact your local legislators and ask them to vote against SJR6. Click here to find your legislators’ contact information.

Every civics class in every high school teaches that there are three branches of government: executive (the governor), legislative (the General Assembly), and the judicial (the court system). Traditionally in our country, the courts have the power to pass their own rules regarding how the court system works. These rules include how a judge rules on particular kinds evidence, how to process a case through the court system, how to appeal cases, and how to regulate the conduct of lawyers and judges.

The courts don’t pass laws, they merely enforce the ones passed by the Legislature. Occasionally, the General Assembly passes laws that try to tell the court system how to do its job, and the courts declare those laws unconstitutional. Some newcomers to the Legislature are upset that a group of laws passed in 2003 have been declared unconstitutional because they tried to tell the court system how to do its job. This resolution is the result.

One of the primary purposes of the court system is to make sure the law is applied consistently, year after year. This resolution would make the law much more inconsistent because the rules of the court system would likely change every two years. We have tens of thousands of laws and hundreds of court rules, so it is already hard enough for ordinary citizens to know what the law is. When rules change constantly, courts can’t consistently apply the law, and most folks won’t be aware of harmful changes.

This resolution is not constitutionally conservative, and we oppose it. But don’t take our word for it. The Arkansas Bar Association voted to oppose the resolution, and it is made up of all types of lawyers on all sides of the aisle: judges, prosecutors, criminal defense lawyers, and civil plaintiff and defense attorneys. 

Bottom line: this resolution is bad for ordinary Arkansans. We need your help in opposing it. Please contact your legislators today, and ask your friends and families to do the same.

Ticket to Work

Some people receiving SSD or SSI benefits think they have recovered enough to be able to work, but are afraid of losing benefits if they try and don't succeed.

Fortunately, the Social Security Administration has a Ticket to Work program that allows SSD/SSI beneficiaries to give work a try without risk of losing benefits. The program is called Ticket to Work, and it will allow a beneficiary to keep benefits while exploring employment, receiving vocational rehabilitation, or gaining work experience. Benefits only stop once the beneficiary begins earning enough to support him- or herself.

Visit the Ticket to Work program website for more information.

Hilary speaks at law day

This past weekend, Hilary Chaney presented at Law Day at the Willie Hinton Neighborhood Resource Center in Little Rock. The purpose of Law Day was to provide free legal services and agency information to members of the community. The primary target population for Law Day was the formerly incarcerated. Hilary spoke about her Social Security Disability and Supplemental Security Income practice. She answered legal questions concerning the disability application process, the income and resource limit on SSI, and how to obtain medical records to support a disability appeal. Hilary assists current clients through all levels of appeal, including the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, which is the ultimate arbiter of disability claims. Many attorneys do not take cases through the last several levels of appeal, but Hilary and Don will fight to the finish for clients who have legitimate disabilities and cannot work.

Hilary enjoyed speaking with members of the community and welcomes inquiries from those seeking benefits. Our office can interview clients over the phone and serves all of southern Arkansas. Remember, you only pay us if you win your benefits.