Restraining Order against Social Security Judge Dan R. Hyatt
 

To: Hearing Office Director
Social Security Office of Disability Adjudications and Review
 And Chief Administrative Law Judge Say
Portland Oregon

 Re: restraining order prohibiting certain acts by administrative law judge Dan R. Hyatt

Greetings:

  You have in your employment Dan R. Hyatt as a hearing officer.  The Circuit Court of the State of Oregon, County of Washington has issued a restraining order;

  If Dan R. Hyatt enters Duncan Plaza or even “attempting to enter” Duncan Plaza then Dan R. Hyatt will be subject to immediate arrest for violation of the Circuit Court Order.  The Circuit Court of the State of Oregon warned prior to the issuing of the restraining Order that once arrested the respondent is usually incarcerated for two weeks.

 When the Circuit Court issued the Order against further attacks on disabled and elderly by Dan R. Hyatt it stated, “Nobody should be treated like this. I am outraged.  But it is even MORE outrageous when a man who has become disabled while serving his country is treated like this.” (or words to that effect)

Petitioner Information

1.     

20.   I then went into the lobby of ODAR with my lawyer where my husband was sitting.  My lawyer Daniel A. Bernath looked at my husband and I and said, “let’s get out of here and we’ll talk outside.”

21.   Dan then led the way, holding his black cane/crutch in his right hand, pulling his big box of books with wheels with his right hand and wearing a homburg hat.  He was looking very dashing.

22.   Dan was leading.  My husband was following him and I was following my husband when we turned the corner to the elevator lobby of the 4^th floor.

23.   I saw an old short man wearing a brown colored outfit in blue jeans with silver hair already inside an elevator.  Except for him the elevator was empty. 

24.   When we approached the elevator to get in, the old man quickly ran forward from the back of the elevator and stood at the front of the elevator and shouted “No” “You’re not riding on that elevator” “No”! 

25.   The old man alone in the elevator was very belligerent and confrontational.

26.   My lawyer did not enter the elevator because the old man blocked him.

27.   My lawyer never said a word to the old man.

28.   The man then bumped my lawyer with his chest.

29.   I saw my lawyer kind-of step back from the force of the blow but my lawyer couldn’t back up because the wheels of the box stopped him and there was me and about 4 people trying to get on the elevator and they were right behind him.

30.   The man then hit my lawyer a second time but this time with much more power and with his chest and his stomach this time.

31.   My lawyer had to work to get his balance after being knocked off his feet.

32.   The man then said “call the police.  I want him arrested for assault.  He just bumped me.”

33.   My husband R* said in a quiet voice, “no he didn’t.  You bumped him.”

34.   The man then got a very wild look on his face and was very aggressive and said to R, “what’s your name!” 

35.   The man alone in the elevator became even more aggressive and offensive.  He had a very wild look in his eyes.

36.   That was the only time my lawyer spoke and  said, “Don’t answer that.”

37.   The security guards came.

38.   That man was taken around the corner away from us.  I later found out that the old man’s name is Dan R. Hyatt.

39.   At no time did my lawyer’s hands leave the box handle or his cane/crutch.  At no time did his cane/crutch or box leave the floor.  At no time did my lawyer come in contact with that man except when that man hit my lawyer with first his chest and then with his stomach and his chest to knock my lawyer on the floor or back.  No part of my lawyer’s body entered the elevator.  Dan R. Hyatt used his chest and stomach to repeatedly batter my lawyer who stood out in the hallway.

40.   Hyatt didn’t want my lawyer in that elevator at all even though it was completely empty and even though there were 3 to 4 elevators on one side and 3 to 4 elevators on the other side of the hallway.

41.   The security guards came and blocked us from leaving and my lawyer asked “am I under arrest” and they said “no but you can’t leave.”  He said “then I’m leaving now” and tried to push the button for an elevator but they blocked him from leaving.

42.   The federal police came and they roughly grabbed my lawyer’s hands behind him and put handcuffs on him.  As they were leading him back to the Social Security Court with his hands tightly cuffed behind him I heard my lawyer say to them “on advice of counsel I have nothing to say.”

43.   The federal police asked me if I saw what happened.  They took my license information but didn’t write down what I was saying.  There was a second policeman and when they confirmed that I had made a statement then said I could leave (but could not talk to my lawyer).

44.   I haven’t left my house since that traumatic event in watching my lawyer get assaulted and battered and arrested nearly a week ago. 

45.   Seeing your lawyer get arrested is like seeing your Father get arrested and hauled away.  I trust my lawyer and it was all extremely traumatic to me to see my lawyer get beaten and then get arrested and handcuffed and taken away to who-knows-where.

46.   I am going to meet with my doctor so I can discuss the severe trauma I have suffered because I watched my lawyer get assaulted and battered by Hyatt and then arrested by 3 or 4 very large policemen.

witness #1
Witness #2

March 23, 2008

Dear Sirs or Madams:

I am a disabled United States Navy veteran of the Vietnam War and the Cold War. I am rated at 90% disabled by the US Department of Veterans Affairs.  I suffer from PTSD, Depression and neuropathy, to name a few because of my service during the Vietnam War and during the capture of the USS Pueblo by the North Korea Communists/show of force by the US Navy thereafter and other encounters with the Soviet Navy and Air Force in the Cold War, serving in both the Atlantic Fleet and Pacific Fleet of the US Navy. http://www.yorktownsailor.com/yorktown/pueblo.htm

I am a life member of the Veterans of Foreign Wars and the USS Yorktown Association and operate a website that is a tribute to the service of those great aviators and sailors in wartime.http://www.YorktownSailor.com

Because of my war times service and injuries I move much more slowly than before. I use one to two crutches at all times because if I do not I will fall over into a wall or onto the floor. My handwriting has deteriorated to the point where I can barely read it. Working on the flight deck of two aircraft carriers with screaming jet engines and no ear protection has affected my hearing, among other things.

The Social Security Administration, by and through Administrative Law Judge Dan R. Hyatt. has treated me, a disabled United States veteran in a shameful fashion. When the recorder was off after a Social Security hearing and in front of at least two witnesses (and when knew the recorder was off because he ordered it off apparently so there would be no recording of his misconduct), told me to get out of the courtroom and I endeavored to comply with his wishes. As he knows, I have a bookcase on wheels, a separate brief case for client’s files and all the contents were spread upon the counsel desk plus one to two crutches. The entire contents of my law office on wheels is about 30 pounds.

I was putting all these items away and placing the brief case on top of the book case with wheels when again ordered me to “leave or I’ll call in Tim to throw you out.” Tim was the 300 pound plus contract guard in the ODAR office. He has had several “run-ins” with disabled people at Social Security and has finally separated from his employment there with absolutely no advance notice where he has escorted people out of Social Security for the slightest real or imagined infraction.

Indeed, I once handed a note that I wrote out by hand. He said, “I can’t read your writing…read it to me.” I said, “Sorry about my handwriting…” but before I could finish in a very mocking tone stated “yeah, yeah. I’m sure you’ve got lots of disabilities.” (exact words on disk)

SSA has a duty to comply with ADA and other applicable regulation and laws and permit me time to egress from a hearing at my best speed and not have me physically “thrown out” and permit disabled United States Navy veterans dignity.

I cannot move any faster than I did on that day and indeed, my medical doctors say that my condition is degenerative so my speed will only anger Dan R. Hyatt more in the future. I live in fear that Dan R. Hyatt will use some other force to have me thrown out of a hearing in the future (my law practice is obtaining benefits for disabled people) if I don’t move to quickly to leave when he abruptly ends a hearing after a few minutes or at the end of a hearing.

In fact, as I cannot hear as well as I could before I served aboard the USS Kearsarge and the USS Yorktown I sometimes have to ask people to repeat themselves or cup my hand to my ear. At one recently hearing I asked to clarify what he meant when he said, “one more interruption from you and you’re finished” because I feared I missed something as the comment by didn’t make sense and was not a term I had ever heard a judge make in nearly 25 years since I became a member of the Bar and have been doing my duty to clients in courts. It was at that point abruptly ended the hearing.

This discrimination and abuse of disabled United States Navy veterans is unconscionable. I am researching to find an attorney who can bring this issue to the United States District Court but I also want to put you on notice that this is occurring apparently each and every day in a hearing room of the Social Security Administration

Daniel A. Bernath
Attorney at Law 
Member United States Supreme Court Bar. Member California Bar
13500 SW Pacific PMB #202
Tigard, Oregon 97223
(503) 639 6666 ussyorktown@comcast.net

Friday, April 4, 2008

Office of Disability Adjudication and Review
17^th Floor ODS Tower
601 SW Second Avenue
Portland OR 97204-9701

RE: Dan R. Hyatt

Dear Hearing Office Director:

I request additional security at ODAR because I fear that your employee Dan R. Hyatt may again lose control and physically harm me. I am a 90% disabled Vietnam War and Cold War veteran who must use a crutch to get around. Please contact the federal protective service to have one of their officers sit in the hearing room with me and Dan R. Hyatt on April 28.

He has stated that he will retaliate against me for some imagined slight and so far, (the Oregon State Bar has revealed) that he stole US Government property in his apparent attempt to hurt me, he has threatened to have me thrown out of a hearing room because I was too slow in his opinion in egression.

I am entitled to a safe environment as is my client when appearing before your agency and your office.

I fear, from his out of control and angry behavior in the past that he might harm me or my client at the April 28, 2008 hearing.

Please refer to the letter I wrote previously about Dan R. Hyatt ’s threats and intimidation tactics.

Respectfully,

Original signed

Daniel A. Bernath
Attorney at Law

 Saturday, April 19, 2008

Regional Chief Judge of Social Security
Office of Disability Adjudication and Review
Suite 2900
701 Fifth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98104-7075

Re: Investigation of fitness of Dan R. Hyatt continue employment with

Social Security as administrative law judge

Dear Chief Judge:

I have obtained further records from the Oregon State Bar regarding the many complaints of the helpless, disabled Oregon and Washington State citizens that must encounter the anger, rage, bigotry, extra-judicial bias and unethical conduct of Dan R. Hyatt.

I have now obtained an October 8, 2002, affidavit of Alan Stuart Graf revealing Dan R. Hyatt admitting that he betrays his oath as administrative law judge by deciding cases because he likes or dislikes an attorney rather than because of the facts of the case.

" told me that in close cases he ruled for claimant's whose attorneys he liked in contrast to ruling against claimants who were represented by attorneys whom Dan R. Hyatt not like."

As Dan R. Hyatt is cruel to all attorneys and claimants, it is impossible to know if an attorney is on his S list. Perhaps the only thing the Social Security Agency can do to protect these helpless claimants in Washington State and Oregon would be to publish a list of attorneys whom Dan R. Hyatt “liked” and “did not like” as a public service so claimants can consult the list when hiring a Social Security representative. From my observation, Dan R. Hyatt doesn’t like anyone, however.

I have previously provided you with a statement whereby Dan R. Hyatt calls a white woman married to a black man for twenty years, “WHITE TRASH” and says that he will rule against these disabled people because he has a problem with interracial couples and white people not married to other white people (and thus he is not ruling on the facts but on his own racial bigotry.)

I now supply you with many statements more plus a letter from the Oregon State Bar stating that their complaint file against your Dan R. Hyatt now totals NINE HUNDRED PAGES for what is perceived to be unethical conduct by Dan R. Hyatt. I suggest you get these 900 pages to properly evaluate Dan R. Hyatt’s unfitness to serve in such an important job affecting so many helpless people.

As per law and regulation, please refer these matters to the proper authorities for Dan R. Hyatt’s employment termination so that Dan R. Hyatt’s bigotry and extra-judicial bias will no longer be visited upon the vulnerable disabled people of Oregon and Washington State.

Respectfully,

Daniel A. Bernath

Daniel A. Bernath Attorney at Law

Index of all complaints regarding administrative law judge Dan R. Hyatt
click here: http://www.oregonshyster.com/shyster/hyattindex2.htm

****

  Based on this and other conduct, Mr. Lowry requested that ALJ Dan Hyatt be disqualified for bias or prejudice, Dan Hyatt instigated a campaign to disparage and defame Mr. Lowry and to interfere with his client relations and business expectancy.  In a letter dated April 19, 1998, defendant Dan Hyatt stated in part, "Your fee Agreements which provide for a fee of 25% of back benefits in Title 16 cases will always be disapproved by me, as fees must be petitioned in Title 16 cases and I have no authority to approve any fee at all in those cases."  This statement by Dan Hyatt is false and in fact such fee agreements are routinely approved.  Defendant Dan Hyatt subsequently admitted this falsity.

Defendant Hyatt also began issuing letters to Lowry's clients.  He advised them that he was not biased, contrary to Lowry's motions for recusal.  A copy of a letter which was written by defendant Dan Hyatt to one of Plaintiff's clients appears at ER 127.

  On approximately December 1, 1998, plaintiff sent a letter to the Regional Chief ALJ discussing defendant Dan Hyatt's conduct.  Specifically, the letter reported how, on two occasions, defendant Dan Hyatt instructed Mr. Lowry's clients-claimants appearing before ALJ Dan Hyatt-that Mr. Lowry was a "poor attorney who does a poor job for his clients."  Mr. Lowry sought agency action precluding the defendant ALJ Dan Hyatt (and two others) from hearing his cases.  On December 3, 1998 the Regional Chief Judge responded in writing (stating that by and by a response would be forthcoming.)

  The Regional Chief ALJ subsequently informed Lowry that the remedy he sought-blanket recusal of the defendant ALJs-was unavailable.  (The Commissioner of Social Security has since changed her position and now agrees that she can assign different ALJs to all of plaintiff's cases, but has refused to do so ER 172)  On January 19, 1999, plaintiff sent a letter to the Appeals Council outlining the evidence of ALJ Dan Hyatt's misconduct and bias.

    On February 10, 1999 defendant Dan Hyatt contacted plaintiff and scheduled a meeting over the noon hour to discuss their working relationship and how to resolve a particular case before ALJ Dan Hyatt.  During the February 11, 1999 meeting ALJ Dan Hyatt threatened to have plaintiff disbarred from practice before the Social Security Administration.  ER 120

  On February 19, 1999, Mr. Lowry received an anonymous note from an OHA (now called ODAR) whistleblower disclosing the following information about Defendants Dan Hyatt et al.,  

ALJs....are conspiring against you and the claimants you represent.  They held meetings.  there is a paper trail.  SSA and OHA may be liable for their illegal conduct.  ER 142.

On March 25, 1999 Mr. Lowry received a second anonymous note from an OHA whistleblower disclosing the following information:

On 3/9/99 Reg Chief ALJ Ranney visited the Portland OHA and had an extensive meeting with the ALJs.  He heard their complaints about you.  He encouraged them to collect more "documentation" of your misconduct and incompetence and forward the information to his Reg. Attny Charlie Center for action.  HOCALJ Atkins and Dan Hyatt were the most vocal.  ER 143.

  On or about April 19, 1999, plaintiff caused a demand letter to be sent to defendants Dan Hyatt, et al., and to the Regional Chief ALJ.  Plaintiff requested that defendants Dan Hyatt, et al., voluntarily recuse themselves or, alternatively, that they be disqualified from hearing any cases in which plaintiff represents the claimants.  The Regional Chief ALJ denied the request...stating that plaintiff has no remedy for a blanket disqualification and must present disqualification motions on a case-by-case basis to the respective defendant administrative law judges.  In the same letter the Regional Chief ALJ made the following veiled threat:

I would anticipate that such a decision would be preceded by a full and fair discloser that allows the claimant to make an informed decision as to whether such an objection should be raised.  Suffice it to say that failure to do so advise a claimant and assisting an uninformed or poor informed claimant in the making of such an objection could constitute evidence of inadequate representation on the part of the representative.  ER 125

  Defendant ALJ Dan Hyatt et al., and the others have all refused to recuse themselves from hearing plaintiff's cases when a motion to presented in individual disability cases for recusal due to bias. ALJ Hyatt, et al, assert that they are not biased and deny the motion.  Simultaneously the ALJ's have apparently filed "complaints" with the SSA about Mr. Lowry's conduct.  The same individual who is investigating claims of judicial bias, is also investigating the complaints against plaintiff Lowry ER 201.  (SSA has enacted extensive regulations about attorney conduct before the agency.  62 F.R. 41, 404-41 (8/4/98) reprinted at http://www.ssa.gov )

  On or about April 29, 1999 defendant Dan Hyatt issued a decision in a Social Security disability case finding Mr. Lowry's client disabled, however, the Dan Hyatt also alleged that Lowry had committed the following ethical violations:

At hearing, it became clear that the claimant's representative was aware of records which reflect this finding of medical improvement, but made no effort to produce it for the hearing.  Mr. Lowry, who is a member of the Oregon State Bar, has an ethical obligation under the Code of Professional Responsibility to disclose such evidence where, as here, he is seeking continuing disability.  This representative also may have violated DR 7-106 by refusing to comply with a standing Order of the forum to complete and submit a Claimant's Questionnaire prior to the hearing, and by filing a frivolous motion to disqualify the undersigned, Dan Hyatt.  The latter conduct may also be a violation of DR 8-102.  While Mr. Lowry's violation of the rules of this professional are matters strictly within the purview of the Oregon State Bar, his conduct in this matter is condemned.

  Defendant Dan Hyatt denies that this statement, contained in a written decision about a claimant's disability application was motivated by bias.  Tr. 176  (Mr. Lowry disputes the factual accuracy of Defendant Dan Hyatt's accusations.)

  Defendant Dan Hyatt also has issued an undated and unsigned letter that is disparaging of Mr. Lowry. Beginning on or about July 19, 1999, Defendant Dan Hyatt began producing this letter at hearings in which Mr. Lowry was the claimant's representative and has required one or more claimants to read the letter. ER 120

  On or about March 24, 2000, plaintiff received another anonymous note from an OHA whistleblower disclosing the following information:

  For some some reason ALJ's Atkins and Engleman are bragging about the price you and your disabled clients will pay for bringing the lawsuit against them.  OHA's regional office and the Chief ALJ seem to be in agreement.  ER 166

  Since mid-1998, Mr. Lowry has notified the OHA Appeals Council of the misconduct and prejudice exhibit by Dan Hyatt towards Mr. Lowry and his client.  The Appeals Council conducts a case by case review of claimant's disability claims and does not consider the "totality of the evidence" which demonstrates bias against Mr. Lowry.  The Appeals Council had not response to Mr. Lowry's complaints.  ER 121, 167-9

****

footnote 7

The Magistrate Judge's Findings (in Portland Oregon) of March 2, 2000 even note the seriousness of the interference with Lowry's ability to practice law.  The Court stated, "In this case, the ALJ's allegedly singled out Lowry for harsh criticism in front of his clients, denied all his attorney fee requests in Title 16 cases, threatened to have him disbarred from practicing before SSA and engaged in ex parte conduct with his clients to tell them that Lowry is not a good attorney. These actions, if they occurred without cause, are clearly arbitrary and unreasonable with no substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals or general welfare.  Further, SSA's tacit approval of these actions by not stopping them or implementing regulations to adequately deal with them is just as arbitrary and unreasonable. ER 63-4  At least one other attorney has noted the impropriety of ALJ Dan Hyatt's conduct.  ER 196