What's New:

Attorney Robert R. McGill will be answering questions about Federal Disability Retirement in a new forum at Martindale-Hubbell's Lawyers.com.

Latest Articles:

Federal and Postal Disability Retirement: The Frustrating Process 07/29/2010 by Federal Lawyer As with most administrative dealings with the government (Federal, State or local), the process itself is a frustrating one. Filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS [...]   Early Retirement for Disabled Federal Workers: The Percentage Language Game 07/28/2010 by Federal Lawyer To the question: "What medical disabilities do you have," is often the response in terms of a percentage language game: "The VA has given me a ____"; "My doctor rated me at____". [...]   OPM Disability Retirement: A Different Language Game 07/27/2010 by Federal Lawyer Wittgenstein was a philosopher who is well-known for his discussion about different "language games". In preparing a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS or CSRS, [...]   Federal Worker Disability Retirement: Agency Accommodation Reiterated 07/26/2010 by Federal Lawyer In most cases, the agency is unable to accommodate the individual. By "accommodation" is often meant lessening the workload, or temporarily allowing for the medical conditions [...]   Federal Worker Disability Retirement: Not all Agencies are Equal 07/24/2010 by Federal Lawyer No names will be named. Not for purposes of "protecting the innocent", because it is doubtful that there are any innocent entities, anyway. Rather, the knowledge that there are some [...]   Medical Retirement Benefits for US Government Employees: Agency Adverse Actions 07/23/2010 by Federal Lawyer Agency actions of an adverse nature seem to go hand-in-hand with filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS & CSRS. If one pauses for a moment, one can easily understand [...]   Federal Disability Retirement: Agency Overstepping 07/22/2010 by Federal Lawyer The Office of Personnel Management is the Federal Agency which reviews, evaluates and determines the eligibility of an applicant for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS or CSRS. [...]   read all blogs »

The Bruner Presumption
Legal Analysis of Non-Statutory Laws

---

This is an important concept and one which all disability retirement applicants should be aware of. It is well-established law that an employee's removal for his or her physical inability to perform the essential functions of his job or position, constitutes prima facie evidence that he is entitled to disability retirement as a matter of law, and that the burden of production then shifts to OPM to produce evidence sufficient to support a finding that the applicant is not entitled to disability retirement benefits. See Bruner v. Office of Personnel Management, 996 F.2d 290, 294 (Fed. Cir. 1993); and Marczewski v. Office of Personnel Management, 80 M.S.P.R. 343 (1998). What this means, essentially, is that if a Federal or Postal employee is removed for his or her medical inability to perform his/her job, the "burden of production" is placed onto OPM. It is as if OPM must "disprove" a disability retirement case, as opposed to an individual having to prove his/her right to disability retirement. It is a "prima facie" case, in that, by having your Agency remove you for your inability to perform your job, it is considered a valid case "on its face".

Further, in more recent cases, the Merit Systems Protection Board has held that the Bruner Presumption also applies where "removal for extended absences is equivalent to removal for physical inability to perform where it is accompanied by specifications indicating that the decision to remove was based on medical documentation suggesting that the appellant was disabled and unable to perform her duties." McCurdy v. OPM, DA-844E-03-0088-I-1 (April 30, 2004), citing as authority Ayers-Kavtaradze v. Office of Personnel Management, 91 M.S.P.R. 397 (2002). This means that the removal itself need not specifically state that you are being removed for your medical inability to perform your job; it can remove you for other reasons stated, such as "extended absences", as long as you can establish a paper-trail showing that those extended absences were based upon a medical reason.

---