Reflux Sympathetic Dystrophy (also known as
Complex Regional Pain Syndrome) Case Study #1
Claimant: 49 year old female
Occupation: past work as an underwriter in the mortgage industry
Education: high school graduate
Hearing info: Claimant applied for benefits in November, 2004, alleging an onset date in November, 2003. The hearing was held in Atlanta in November, 2007. This was a case where the hearing office called my office in mid-October to schedule a case in early November. Normally, our office gets a 45 to 60 day notice – in this case the judge’s assistant asked us to waive the standard notice period, which we did. As a result of the expedited hearing, my paralegal had to gather a lot of documentation to update the file and we submitted well over 100 pages of updated medical records.
Background: My client is a 49 year old female who last worked in 1999 prior to giving birth to her son. In November, 2003 she went to the doctor for a routine issue and ended up with nerve damage to her right hip. She then began a quest for a cure, visiting specialist after specialist without success. Objective testing was negative and she eventually ended up with a diagnosis of complex regional pain syndrome. CRPS is more commonly known as reflex sympathetic dystrophy or R.S.D.
R.S.D. occurs primarily in females and is usually the result of a trauma. You can read more about RSD here. R.S.D. patients often have MRI’s, x-rays, nerve conduction studies and other tests that do not show a specific injury. Yet, the condition can be extremely painful and debilitating.
In my client’s case she ended up at a pain management clinic where she is prescribed pain medication, sleeping medication and given exercises to help her “live with the pain.”
Hearing strategy: My client is a quiet woman and speaks with a somewhat flat affect. She acknowledges that living with chronic pain has left her somewhat depressed and resigned to living in pain the rest of her life.
My client is married and her husband earns a very nice living. She has had the wherewithal to visit numerous doctors and she has a full time nanny to help care for her child. Judges rarely see claimants who are not in financial distress and I was concerned that my client’s financial status along with her lack of emotion in speaking might make her a less sympathetic witness.
Update: the judge issued an unfavorable decision in this case. The judge appeared to be bothered by the nature and extent of the claimant’s activities, which included frequent travel and in-town activities. She concluded that the claimant was not a credible witness.
The claimant’s husband called me after receiving the unfavorable decision. He believes that the judge was biased against the claimant because the claimant lives in a well-to-do family. He asked me to file an appeal of the unfavorable decision, which I have done.