I-5-4-65.Surrell v. Willman

Table of Contents
I Purpose
II Background
III Definitions of the Class
IV Processing Instructions
V Inquiries
Attachment 1 Final Order Approving Settlement; Entered by the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska on March 7, 2000
Attachment 2 Amendment to Settlement Agreement; Entered by the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska on June 9, 2000

Issued: January 18, 2001

Expiration: No expiration date

I. Purpose

This Temporary Instruction advises OHA adjudicators of the Final Order entered by the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska on March 7, 2000, approving the parties' settlement agreement in the Surrell v. Willman class action. The Surrell class action involved alleged deficiencies by the Nebraska Disability Determination Services (DDS) regarding its actions and procedures in processing disability cases.

The final settlement order does not require OHA to process cases any differently. However, we are providing these instructions for informational purposes. Program Operations Manual System instructions have been printed and distributed to advise field office and DDS adjudicators of their responsibilities under the Surrell settlement agreement.

II. Background

On November 24, 1997, plaintiff filed a class action complaint against the Nebraska DDS and the Commissioner challenging the policies, practices and procedures that the State defendant uses in determining disability for Social Security purposes. Plaintiff also alleged that the Commissioner failed to exercise his oversight authority and to acquiesce in circuit court case law.

Specifically, plaintiff alleged that (1) the DDS did not properly evaluate the claimant's subjective complaints pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 423(d)(1)(A) and Polaski v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320 (8th Cir. 1984), supplemented 751 F.2d 943 (8th Cir. 1984); (2) the DDS did not make an express credibility determination and set forth the inconsistencies in the record that led it to reject the claimant's complaints of pain expressly discussing the Polaski factors; (3) the DDS did not obtain a proper consultative examination and report contrary to the regulations; (4) the DDS failed to utilize the services of a qualified vocational expert in evaluating an applicant's claim contrary to Federal regulations and Eight Circuit case law; and (5) the assessments by the DDS of residual functional capacity did not support an adjudicative conclusion. Plaintiffs requested declaratory and injunctive relief, redeterminations for all class members and monitoring of future State and Federal disability determinations.

On September 4, 1998, the court issued a memorandum and order conditionally denying the Federal defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint provided that the complaint was amended within ten days. The court observed that plaintiff had not alleged or argued that she had exhausted her administrative remedies under the Social Security Act but instead argued that waiver of exhaustion should apply. The court then noted that in order to warrant waiver of administrative remedies under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), plaintiff must show that (1) her claim was collateral to her claim for disability benefits; (2) irreparable injury will follow and (3) exhaustion would be futile. The court found that although plaintiff had satisfied the first prong, she had failed to make any allegations with regard to the second and third prerequisites to waiver of administrative remedies. The order also granted the State defendant's motion to dismiss to the extent that plaintiff sought retroactive money damages and a declaration that the State defendant had violated the law. On September 25, 1998, plaintiff filed an amended complaint which contained allegations regarding the second and third waiver of exhaustion factors.

On February 19, 1999, claimant Tammy Shutt filed a motion to intervene, and, on March 30, 1999, following the approval of her motion, filed an intervenor's complaint. On September 17, 1999, the court issued a memorandum and order denying plaintiff's motion for class certification.

In October 1999, the parties filed a jointly negotiated settlement proposal with the court. The agreement provided relief to all Nebraska residents who have been denied title II and/or title XVI disability benefits because either they received (1) a final reconsideration denial by the Nebraska DDS on or after September 25, 1997 through February 8, 1999 based on certain findings by the Nebraska DDS and did not appeal to an Administrative Law Judge; or (2) a final initial denial by the Nebraska DDS on or after September 25, 1997 through January 1, 2000 based on certain findings by the Nebraska DDS and did not appeal to the reconsideration level.

On December 3, 1999, the court gave its preliminary approval to the parties' settlement agreement and scheduled a fairness hearing. On March 7, 2000, following the fairness hearing, the court issued a final judgment approving the settlement agreement. The agreement became final on May 9, 2000.

III. Definitions of the Class

  1. Subject to the exclusions in Part III B., Surrell class members eligible to request relief are:

    1. All Nebraska residents who:

      • received a final reconsideration denial by the Nebraska DDS at step four or five of the sequential evaluation process, on or after September 25, 1997 through February 8, 1999 and did not appeal the reconsideration level denial at issue to an ALJ; and

      • applied for title II and/or title XVI disability benefits after February 8, 1999 through October 31, 2000 and receive a medical allowance at the reconsideration level; or

      • received a final initial denial by the Nebraska DDS, at step four or step five of the sequential evaluation process on or after September 25, 1997 through January 1, 2000 and did not appeal the initial level denial at issue to the reconsideration level; and

      • applied for title II and/or title XVI disability benefits after January 1, 2000 through January 1, 2001 and receive a medical allowance at the initial level;

      or

    2. All Nebraska residents who meet the requirements in Part III A. 1. (first or third bullets) and

      • who were receiving title II and/or title XVI disability benefits on May 9, 2000; or

      • have a claim for title II and/or title XVI disability benefits pending at any administrative level or in Federal court on May 9, 2000, and subsequently receive a medical allowance on that claim; or

      • apply for title II and/or title XVI disability benefits within one year after May 9, 2000 and receive at the reconsideration level, a res judicata denial based on the prior denials in Part III A. 1. (first bullet) or at the initial level, a res judicata denial based on the prior denial(s) in Part III A.1. (third bullet).

  2. A person is not a Surrell class member eligible for relief if he or she:

    • has already received a final subsequent award of benefits with respect to the same period of time at issue as the denial in Part III A. 1. (first or third bullets);

    • has received a determination on reconsideration from the Nebraska DDS after February 8, 1999 covering the same period of time as the denial in Part III.A.1. (first bullet); or

    • has received an initial determination from the Nebraska DDS after January 1, 2000 covering the same period of time at issue as the denial in Part III. A. 1. (third bullet); or

    • appealed, or appeal all of their reconsideration denials to an ALJ, the Appeals Council or to court; or

    • applied for title XVI childhood disability benefits; or

    • are not eligible for reasons unrelated to disability.

IV. Processing Instructions

At the OHA level, the Surrell settlement agreement does not require any difference in the processing of class member claims. OHA should follow normal processing and adjudication procedures. In addition, unlike other class action processing instructions, OHA does not have any screening responsibilities pursuant to the settlement agreement and the consolidation of Surrell claims with subsequent claims should not arise.

If the potential class member has a claim pending at any administrative level or in Federal court on May 9, 2000, and that claim is subsequently allowed, the potential class member will later be sent a notice inquiring as to whether he or she wishes to request review of their Surrell claim(s). The potential class members will have their claim(s) reviewed under the terms of the Surrell settlement agreement. The notice will include a reply card to request the redetermination.

V. Inquiries

Hearing Office personnel should direct any questions to their Regional Office. Regional Office personnel should contact the Division of Field Practices and Procedures in the Office of the Chief Administrative Law Judge at (703) 605-8530. OHA Headquarters personnel should contact the Special Counsel Staff at (703) 605-8250.

Attachments

1 — Final Order Approving Settlement; Entered by the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska on March 7, 2000

2 — Amendment to Settlement Agreement; Entered by the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska on June 9, 2000

Attachment 1. Final Order Approving Settlement; Entered by the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska on March 7, 2000

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

JANETTE L. SURRELL, On her own Behalf and on Behalf of all Others Similarly Situated,

Plaintiffs,

TAMMY SCHUTT,

Plaintiff/Intervenor,

vs.

DOUGLAS WILLMAN, in his Official Capacity as Director of the Nebraska Disability Determination Services; and

KENNETH S. APFEL, in his Official Capacity as the United States Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendants.






Civil Action No. 4:97CV3369





SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

WHEREAS the parties desire to resolve all of the claims and issues raised in this action without the time and expense of further litigation;

NOW, THEREFORE, plaintiffs and defendants enter into this Settlement Agreement, stipulate that it constitutes a full and complete resolution of plaintiffs' claims, and agree to the following:

  1. Definitions

    As used in this Settlement Agreement, the following terms have the meanings stated below:

    1. “Named Plaintiffs” means plaintiff Janette L. Surrell and plaintiff-intervenor Tammy Schutt.

    2. “Plaintiffs” means the Named Plaintiffs and all members of the Plaintiff Class (as that term is defined below), named or unnamed.

    3. “Plaintiffs' Counsel” means the undersigned counsel for the class.

    4. “Defendants” means Douglas Willman, Director of the Nebraska Disability Determinations Service, and Kenneth S. Apfel, Commissioner of Social Security (the “Federal Defendant”), in their official capacities, or their successors in office.

    5. “SSA” means the Social Security Administration.

    6. “Nebraska DDS” or “NDDS” means the Nebraska Disability Determinations Service.

    7. “Parties” means the Plaintiffs and the Defendants.

    8. “Plaintiff Class” means, subject to the exclusions stated in the last sentence of this paragraph:

    1. all Nebraska residents who -

      (1)(A) received a final reconsideration denial by the NDDS, at Step 4 or Step 5 of the sequential evaluation process, on or after September 25, 1997, through February 8, 1999, and did not appeal the reconsideration level denial at issue to an administrative law judge; and

      (B) applied, or apply, for disability benefits under Title II, Title XVI, or both, after February 8, 1999, through October 31, 2000 [by amendment], and receive an allowance at the reconsideration level; or

      (2)(A) received, or receive, a final initial denial by the NDDS, at Step 4 or Step 5 of the sequential evaluation process, on or after September 25, 1997, through January 1, 2000, and did not, or do not, appeal the initial level denial at issue to the reconsideration level; and

      (B) apply for disability benefits under Title II, Title XVI, or both, after January 1, 2000, through January 1, 2001, and receive an allowance at the initial level; and

    2. all Nebraska residents who meet either paragraph 8(a)(1)(A) or paragraph 8(a)(2)(A) above, and -

      (1) were receiving Title II and/or Title XVI disability benefits on the Effective Date of the Settlement Agreement; or

      (2) have a claim for Title II and/or Title XVI benefits pending at any administrative level or in federal court on the Effective Date of this Settlement Agreement, and subsequently receive a medical allowance on that claim; or

      (3) apply for Title II and/or Title XVI benefits within one year after the Effective Date and receive -

      (i) at the reconsideration level, a res judicata denial based on the prior denial referred to in paragraph 8(a)(1)(A); or

      (ii) at the initial level, a res judicata denial based on the prior denial referred to in paragraph 8(a)(2)(A) above.

    The Plaintiff Class excludes those individuals who (1) have already received a subsequent award of benefits with respect to the same time period as the denial identified in paragraph 8(a) or 8(b) above; or (2) appealed, or appeal, all of their denials to an Administrative Law Judge, the Appeals Council, or a court; or (3) have received a determination on reconsideration from the NDDS after February 8, 1999, covering the same time period as the denial identified in paragraph 8(a)(1)(A) above; or (4) have received an initial determination from the NDDS after January 1, 2000, covering the same time period as the denial identified in paragraph 8(a)(2)(A) above; or (5) applied for children's benefits, regardless of whether they applied under Title II or Title XVI, or both; or (6) are not eligible for relief for reasons unrelated to disability.

    9. “Class Member” or “Member of the Class” means a person who falls within the definition of the Plaintiff Class.

    10. “Effective Date” means the later of the following:

    1. if no notice of appeal is filed from the Judgment approving this Settlement Agreement, the day after the expiration of the time for the filing of a notice of appeal under Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure;

    2. if a notice of appeal is filed, the day after the expiration of the time for the filing of a petition for a writ of certiorari from the appellate affirmance; or, if a petition for a writ of certiorari is filed and granted, the date of final affirmance of the Judgment following review pursuant to that grant; or

    3. the date of final dismissal of any appeal from the Judgment, or the date of final dismissal of any proceeding on a writ of certiorari granted to review the Judgment.

    11. “Judgment” means the final judgment to be rendered by the District Court approving this Settlement Agreement.

    12. “Title II” and “Title XVI” refer to Title II and Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 301 et seq., as amended.

  2. Prospective relief

    13. The SSA and the Nebraska DDS will complete the phase-in of enhanced documentation and explanation of disability determinations in Nebraska as follows:

    1. Requests for reconsideration received by the NDDS on or after February 8, 1999, will be processed under enhanced documentation and explanation practices;

    2. Initial requests for disability benefits received by the NDDS on or after January 1, 2000, will be processed under enhanced documentation and explanation practices.

    14. Within ninety days after the Effective Date of this Settlement Agreement, SSA will have completed providing training to the NDDS in the following three areas:

    1. Evaluation of subjective complaints and credibility;

    2. Obtaining a proper consultative examination and report; and

    3. Documentation of residual functional capacity assessments.

    15. The training referred to in paragraph 14 above must address, at a minium, the Commissioner's regulations at 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529 and 416.929; Social Security Rulings 82-41, 82-61, 82-62, 96-3p, 96-7p, and 96-8p; and Polaski v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320 (8th Cir 1984).

    16. SSA will seriously consider the input of Plaintiffs' Counsel in setting the agenda for the training described in paragraphs 14 and 15 above. SSA will notify Plaintiffs' Counsel of the above-described training at least one month in advance of the date any such training is scheduled to take place. Upon request conveyed to SSA at least two weeks before any such training, Plaintiffs' Counsel and/or their designee(s) may attend to observe any such training session.

    17. Within ninety days after the Effective Date of this Settlement Agreement, SSA will prepare a reference guide for the NDDS to follow in processing complex vocational cases.

    18. Beginning within ninety days after the Effective Date of this Settlement Agreement, in addition to federal quality-assurance reviews of NDDS denials, SSA's Office of Quality Assurance and Performance Assessment will conduct EIS (“Early Information Systems”) reviews of disability determinations and rationales prepared by the NDDS under the enhanced documentation and explanation practices referred to in paragraph 13 above, as follows:

    1. Twenty-five (25) NDDS denials on reconsideration, after implementation of enhanced documentation and explanation practices at the reconsideration stage; and

    2. Fifty (50) initial NDDS denials, after implementation of enhanced documentation and explanation practices at the initial stage.

  3. Retroactive Relief

    1. Availability of relief

      19. Any Class Member who requests redetermination as provided for herein will receive a redetermination of the NDDS's denial of the Class Member's claim for disability benefits, as stated below.

      20. The redetermination referred to in the immediately preceding paragraph will occur at the reconsideration level, with full administrative and judicial review rights under 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).

      21. The policies and procedures to be applied in the redetermination of claims pursuant to this Settlement Agreement are found in the Social Security Act, Social Security regulations, Social Security Rulings, and the Program Operations Manual System (“POMS”). Such redeterminations will be consistent with the Commissioner's regulations found at 20 C.F.R. §§ 404.1529 and 416.929 (as amended); Social Security Rulings 96-3p, 96-7p, and 96-8p (unless rescinded); and Polaski v. Heckler, 739 F.2d 1320 (8th Cir. 1984) (subsequent history omitted).

      22. If any Class Member has received more than one denial that falls within the definition of the Plaintiff Class in paragraph 8 above, then all such denials will be subjected to one redetermination covering the aggregate period of disability alleged in all such denied claims.

      23. SSA will promulgate instructions, as part of the POMS, to all personnel charged with implementing the retroactive relief of this Settlement Agreement. SSA will provide a copy of the instructions to Plaintiffs' Counsel prior to their distribution.

    2. Notice of availability of relief

      1. Mail notice

        24. SSA will send individual notices to the last known addresses of persons who fall within paragraph 8(a)(1)(A) or 8(a)(2)(A) above, inviting such persons to file a new claim for benefits by the dates specified in paragraphs 8(a)(1)(B) and 8(a)(2)(B) above, and informing them that, if the new claim results in a finding of disability, they will be able to request a redetermination of the NDDS's denial of the prior claim.

        25. SSA will send a request for review form to the last known addresses of persons who fall within paragraph 8(a)(1)(B), 8(a)(2)(B), or 8(b) above, asking whether the Class Member wants a redetermination of the NDDS's denial of the prior claim. The request for review form will be accompanied by a postage-paid, pre-addressed envelope.

        26. SSA will provide to Plaintiffs' Counsel copies of the notices and forms referred to in paragraphs 24 and 25 above, prior to the distribution of such notices and forms.

        27. To receive a redetermination, a Class Member must return the request for review form within sixty (60) days of the date on which he or she receives the form. If a Class Member does not timely request review in accordance with this paragraph, the prior denial will not be redetermined absent a showing of good cause. A Class Member will be presumed to have received the request for review five (5) days after mailing, unless the Class Member establishes that he or she actually received the request for review at a later date, in which case the sixty (60) days to request redetermination shall be counted from the date of actual receipt.

      2. Poster notice

        28. Upon issuance of the POMS instructions referred to in paragraph 23 above, the Federal Defendant shall prepare a poster notice. The posters shall inform Class Members of their potential right to redetermination of their claims under the terms of this Settlement Agreement.

        29. The Federal Defendant shall distribute posters to all SSA field offices in Nebraska for posting in such offices. Posters shall remain posted in the SSA field offices for a period of one hundred eighty (180) days.

        30. The Federal Defendant shall also provide a reasonable supply of posters to Plaintiff's Counsel that Plaintiff's Counsel may post in locations that Plaintiffs' Counsel determines would best reach potential Class Members during the same 180-day period referred to in paragraph 29 above. This paragraph does not give Plaintiff's Counsel any right to enter property of the United States government or the Nebraska state government, or to display posters on property of the United States government or the Nebraska state government other than offices of the SSA or the Nebraska DDS.

        31. Class Members not receiving notice by mail shall notify the Federal Defendant in writing not later than ninety (90) days after the poster display period ends, if they desire to have a claim redetermined. However, potentially-eligible individuals who receive notice by first-class mail shall not, by responding to the poster notice, be eligible to have the time period extended within which they must respond.

    3. Screening of requests for redetermination

      32. SSA will decide, based on its data processing systems and/or documentation submitted by the individual, whether a person who completes and returns the request for review form described above is entitled to redetermination of a past denial as described herein. If SSA decides that a person who has completed and returned the form is not entitled to a redetermination, SSA will send a notice of its decision to the person's last known address, to the last known address of the person's representative of record, if any, and to Plaintiffs' Counsel. The notice will specify the reason or reasons for SSA's decision; will indicate that the individual may contact Plaintiffs' Counsel if he or she wishes to contest the decision; and will indicate the time in which the decision must be contested, as stated in paragraph 37 below.

      33. Plaintiffs' Counsel may, upon request, inspect the claim file and other materials relied upon by SSA in making any decision that a claimant is not entitled to a redetermination. Such files and other materials will be made available for inspection at a mutually-agreeable time at an office of the SSA. A request to inspect such materials will be made, in writing, to both of the following:

      Surrell Trial Attorney
      Federal Programs Branch
      Civil Division, Room 986
      U.S. Department of Justice
      901 E Street, N.W.
      Washington, DC 20530

      Surrell Reviewer
      Office of the General Counsel
      Social Security Administration
      601 East 12th Street, Room 535
      Kansas City, MO 64106

      34. Absent a showing of good cause by the claimant, SSA need not make available claim files or other materials under Part III.C. of this Settlement Agreement, if the request to inspect such materials is postmarked more than sixty (60) days after the claimant's receipt of the notice described in paragraph 32 above. The claimant will be presumed to have received the notice five days after mailing, unless the claimant establishes that he or she actually received the notice on a later date, in which case the 60-day period required by this paragraph will begin on the date of actual receipt.

      35. Files and materials that are made available under paragraph 33 above will remain available for a maximum of ninety (90) days after SSA notifies Plaintiffs' Counsel of their availability.

      36. Files and materials that are made available under paragraph 33 above will be used only for the purpose of pursuing the individual's claim pursuant to this Settlement Agreement, or as authorized by the claimant.

      37. The Parties will negotiate in good faith to resolve any disputes as to whether a person who has completed and returned a request for review form is entitled to a redetermination as stated in this Settlement Agreement. If the Parties are unable to resolve any such dispute, SSA will send to Plaintiffs' Counsel a written confirmation of the decision that the person is not entitled to a redetermination. Plaintiffs' Counsel may, by motion within sixty (60) days after the written confirmation, submit the unresolved matter to the Court for resolution.

    4. Inspection of redeterminations by plaintiffs' counsel to ascertain possible systemic problems

      38. After one year from the Effective Date of this Settlement Agreement, Defendants will make available for inspection by Plaintiffs' Counsel, as stated herein, the redeterminations made by the Nebraska DDS pursuant to this Settlement Agreement during a continuous six-month period. Such files will be made available for inspection at a mutually-agreeable time at an office of SSA.

      39. Each file made available under the immediately preceding paragraph will remain available for a maximum of ninety days after SSA notifies Plaintiffs' Counsel of its availability. The files may not be removed from the custody of SSA.

      40. Plaintiffs' counsel shall send written notification of any alleged pattern or misapplication of SSA policy that pertains to the claims settled by this Settlement Agreement. The notification will specify the case files upon which Plaintiffs base their allegations, and shall be sent to both of the following:

      Surrell Trial Attorney
      Federal Programs Branch
      Civil Division, Room 986
      U.S. Department of Justice
      901 E Street, N.W.
      Washington, DC 20530

      Surrell Reviewer
      Office of the General Counsel
      Social Security Administration
      601 East 12th Street, Room 535
      Kansas City, MO 64106

      41. Within ninety (90) days after receipt of any written notification specified in paragraph 40 above, SSA will complete its review of the files identified by Plaintiffs' Counsel. The Parties will negotiate in good faith to resolve any disputes. These negotiations will be the final mechanism for resolution of any dispute pertaining to any issues in this lawsuit.

    5. Quarterly Reports

      42. Beginning six months after the date that the Federal Defendant begins sending notices with request for review forms pursuant to paragraph 25 above, the Federal Defendant shall, once each quarter, file with the Court and serve on Plaintiffs' Counsel a status report setting forth the following information with respect to the preceding quarter:

      1. the number of notices with request for review forms sent pursuant to paragraph 25 above;

      2. the number of persons who have requested redeterminations pursuant to Part III of this Settlement Agreement;

      3. the number of Nebraska DDS claimants whom SSA has determined to be Class Members eligible for redetermination;

      4. the number of Nebraska DDS claimants determined by SSA not to be Class Members; and

      5. the numbers of allowances and denials in the redeterminations made pursuant to this Settlement Agreement.

  4. Protection of class member privacy

    43. Simultaneously with this Settlement Agreement, counsel for the Parties will execute a Stipulation and Privacy Act Protective Order to protect the privacy of Class Member claim files and other materials made available to Plaintiffs' Counsel under this Agreement, and to comply with the requirements of the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended, 5 U.S.C. § 552a.

    44. The Stipulation and Privacy Act Protective Order shall be submitted to the Court within five days after its execution.

    45. Plaintiffs' Counsel may not inspect claim files or other materials, as provided for in this Settlement Agreement, until after the Court enters a Privacy Act Protective Order in this action.

    46. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Settlement Agreement, Defendants will not make available to Plaintiffs' Counsel any materials that are protected by 42 U.S.C. § 290dd-2, as amended, and the regulations thereunder. Before making any files or other materials available to Plaintiffs' Counsel under this Settlement Agreement, Defendants will review such files and materials, and will remove any files or documents that contain material protected by 42 U.S.C. § 290dd-2, as amended, and the regulations thereunder.

  5. Enforcement

    47. The Court will retain jurisdiction solely for the purpose of enforcing compliance with this Settlement Agreement. The Parties will attempt to resolve any claim of material breach of this Agreement through negotiations. An attempt at informal resolution will be a prerequisite to any party's request for relief from the Court for an alleged material breach of this Agreement. A material breach, for purposes of this Agreement, is defined as the failure by any party, without substantial justification, to perform a specific duty assumed under this Settlement Agreement.

    48. Before relief is sought from the Court, the following process will be used by the Parties:

    1. The party claiming that a material breach has occurred under this Agreement will, within thirty (30) days after its alleged occurrence, give notice of the claim in writing to the other Parties, and will propose a resolution of the issue.

    2. The other Parties will have thirty (30) days following receipt of the written claim to respond, unless this period is enlarged by agreement of the Parties.

    3. If, after the thirty-day period referred to in paragraph 48(b) above, the party asserting the claim is dissatisfied with the other Parties' responses, or if the other Parties have not responded, then the party asserting the claim may, after giving the other Parties fourteen (14) days' written notice of the intent to do so, pursue relief before the Court consistent with paragraph 47 above.

  6. Attorneys' fees, expenses, and costs

    49. Notice to the Plaintiff Class, as required by the Court, shall be at Defendants' expense.

    50. Plaintiffs' Counsel are entitled to payment of reasonable attorneys' fees, expenses, and costs in prosecuting this action for work that materially advanced the litigation, consistent with applicable legal standards. In the event that the Parties cannot agree to the amount of reasonable attorneys' fees, expenses, and costs as defined above, Plaintiffs shall, within ninety (90) days after the Effective Date of this Agreement, file a fee application to the Court covering the period before execution of this Settlement Agreement.

  7. Dismissal of the action

    51. Upon the Effective Date of this Settlement Agreement, this action shall be dismissed with prejudice, subject to paragraphs 47 and 48 above. The relief set forth in this Agreement constitutes full and final relief for all Class Members for claims set forth in the Plaintiffs' complaint and complaint in intervention, as amended, or arising from the facts set forth in the complaint or the complaint in intervention, as amended, up to and including the Effective Date of this Agreement.

  8. Court approval of settlement

    52. Promptly after execution of this Agreement, but no later than thirty (30) days after the Agreement is signed by counsel for all Parties (unless such time is extended by the written agreement of Plaintiffs' Counsel and Defendants' counsel), counsel for the Parties shall jointly submit the following to the Court:

    1. a joint motion for approval of this Settlement Agreement under Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;

    2. a proposed Order regarding notice to Class Members under Rule 23(e); and

    3. a proposed Order and Judgment approving this Settlement Agreement and dismissing this action with prejudice, but retaining jurisdiction to enforce compliance with this Settlement Agreement, as stated in paragraph 47 above.

    53. The joint motion referred to in paragraph 52 above shall request that the Court:

    1. Certify the Plaintiff Class under Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;

    2. Preliminarily approve this Agreement and the settlement set forth herein as being fair, adequate, and reasonable for the Plaintiff Class;

    3. Approve the form of Notice of Pendency and Settlement of Class Action (“Notice”), as well as the proposed method of giving notice to the Members of the Class by means of publication of the Notice in the Sunday Omaha World Herald and the Sunday Lincoln Journal Star on four successive Sundays, beginning within twenty-one days after the Court approves the form of Notice;

    4. Find that such Notice constitutes the best notice practicable under the circumstances, and constitutes valid, due, and sufficient notice to all Members of the Class, complying fully with the requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Constitution of the United States, and any other applicable law;

    5. Schedule the fairness hearing to be held by the Court to determine whether the proposed settlement contained in this Agreement should be approved as fair, adequate, and reasonable and whether the Judgment approving the settlement should be entered;

    6. Provide that, pending final determination of whether the settlement contained in this Agreement should be approved, neither the Named Plaintiffs, nor any Class Member, either directly, representatively, or in any other capacity, will commence or prosecute any action or proceeding in any court or tribunal asserting any of the class claims against any of the Defendants;

    7. Provide that any objections to the proposed settlement contained in this Agreement or to the entry of Judgment approving the settlement shall be heard only if, on or before a date specified in the Notice Order, persons making objections have filed and served on all Parties notice of their intention to appear (which will set forth each objection and the basis therefor), along with copies of any papers in support of their objections; and

    8. Provide that the fairness hearing may, from time to time and without further notice to the Plaintiff Class, be continued or adjourned by order of the Court.

  9. Miscellaneous provisions

    54. The Parties hereby stipulate to the certification of the Plaintiff Class under Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

    55. With the sole exception of any claim for attorneys fees, expenses, and costs, this Settlement Agreement completely and forever resolves, satisfies, and releases all claims that Plaintiffs alleged or could have alleged against any of the Defendants in connection with this action, or against any of Defendants' departments, agencies, officers, or employees.

    56. The terms of this Settlement Agreement constitute the entire and exclusive agreement of the Parties, and no statement, remark, agreement, or understanding, whether oral or written, which is not contained herein, shall be recognized or enforced. This paragraph does not apply, however, to any agreement between the defendants regarding the payment of Plaintiffs' attorneys' fees, expenses, and costs.

    57. This Settlement Agreement shall not be construed as an admission of the truth of any allegation or the validity of any claim asserted in this action, and it may not be introduced or used in any proceeding other than this action.

    58. Neither the content of the negotiations leading up to this Settlement Agreement, nor any information or communication exchanged by the Parties in the course of those negotiations, may be offered, taken, construed, or introduced as evidence for any purpose, neither in this action nor in any other pending or subsequent proceeding of any kind.

    59. In absence of final court approval of this Settlement Agreement pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this Agreement shall be null and void.

    60. The headings in this Agreement are for the convenience of the Parties only, and shall not limit, expand, modify, or aid in the interpretation or construction of this Agreement.

    61. The Plaintiffs' Counsel who are signatories hereto represent, warrant, and guarantee that they are duly authorized to execute this Settlement Agreement on behalf of Plaintiffs.

    62. This Settlement Agreement is executed in triplicate, and each executed copy will be deemed an original that is binding upon all Parties.

* * * *

APPROVED ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFFS:

__________/s/_____________________ _____________/s/__________________

MAX SCHOTT
THOMAS A. KRAUSE
Max Schott and Associates, P.C.
6959 University Avenue
Des Moines, IA 50311-5409
Telephone: (515) 277-4727

TIMOTHY J. CUDDIGAN, #10857
LISA M. LINE, #20105
Brodkey, Cuddigan, Peebles & Kaplan
444 Regency Parkway Drive, Suite 200
Omaha, NE 68114-3755
Telephone: (402) 397-2000

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS
Date: October __8___, 1999 Date: October ___8__, 1999

APPROVED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT DOUGLAS WILLMAN, DIRECTOR OF NEBRASKA DISABILITY DETERMINATIONS SERVICE:

DON STENBERG, #14023
Attorney General
______________/s/_________________
CHARLOTTE R. KORANDA, #19326
Assistant Attorney General
2115 State Capitol
Lincoln, NE 68509-8920
Telephone: (402) 471-3824

Date: October __13___, 1999

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT DOUGLAS WILLMAN, DIRECTOR OF NEBRASKA DISABILITY DETERMINATIONS SERVICE

APPROVED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT KENNETH S. APFEL, UNITED STATES COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY:

DAVID W. OGDEN
Acting Assistant Attorney General
THOMAS J. MONAGHAN
United States Attorney
PAUL D. BOESHART #10365
Assistant United States Attorney
487 Federal Building
100 Centennial Mall North
Lincoln, Nebraska 68508
Telephone: (402) 437-5241

____________/s/___________________
RICHARD G. LEPLEY
W. SCOTT SIMPSON

Attorneys, Department of Justice
Federal Programs Branch
Civil Division - Room 986
Post Office Box 883
Washington, DC 20044
Telephone: (202) 514-3495

Date: October __7___, 1999

OF COUNSEL:

KRISTI A. SCHMIDT
Assistant Regional Counsel
Office of the General Counsel, Region VII
U.S. Social Security Administration

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT KENNETH S. APFEL, UNITED STATES COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

Attachment 2. Amendment to Settlement Agreement; Entered by the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska on June 9, 2000

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA

JANETTE L. SURRELL, On her own Behalf and on Behalf of all Others Similarly Situated,

Plaintiffs,

TAMMY SCHUTT,

Plaintiff/Intervenor,

vs.

DOUGLAS WILLMAN, in his Official Capacity as Director of the Nebraska Disability Determination Services; and

KENNETH S. APFEL, in his Official Capacity as the United States Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendants.






Civil Action No. 4:97CV3369





AMENDMENT TO
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

WHEREAS the parties have found, in implementing their Settlement Agreement in this action, that a minor amendment to the Agreement is necessary to permit its orderly implementation;

AND WHEREAS all parties concur that the amendment effected hereby is consistent with the purposes of the Settlement Agreement;

NOW, THEREFORE, plaintiffs and defendants enter into this Amendment to the Settlement Agreement that was approved by the Court on March 7, 2000:

  1. Paragraph 8 of the Settlement Agreement is amended to read as follows:

    8. “Plaintiff Class” means, subject to the exclusions stated in the last sentence of this paragraph:

    1. all Nebraska residents who -

      (1)(A) received a final reconsideration denial by the NDDS, at Step 4 or Step 5 of the sequential evaluation process, on or after September 25, 1997, through February 8, 1999, and did not appeal the reconsideration level denial at issue to an administrative law judge; and

      (B) applied, or apply, for disability benefits under Title II, Title XVI, or both, after February 8, 1999, through October 31, 2000, and receive an allowance at the reconsideration level; or

      (2)(A) received, or receive, a final initial denial by the NDDS, at Step 4 or Step 5 of the sequential evaluation process, on or after September 25, 1997, through January 1, 2000, and did not, or do not, appeal the initial level denial at issue to the reconsideration level; and

      (B) apply for disability benefits under Title II, Title XVI, or both, after January 1, 2000, through January 1, 2001, and receive an allowance at the initial level; and

    2. all Nebraska residents who meet either paragraph 8(a)(1)(A) or paragraph 8(a)(2)(A) above, and -

      (1) were receiving Title II and/or Title XVI disability benefits on the Effective Date of the Settlement Agreement; or

      (2) have a claim for Title II and/or Title XVI benefits pending at any administrative level or in federal court on the Effective Date of this Settlement Agreement, and subsequently receive a medical allowance on that claim; or

      (3) apply for Title II and/or Title XVI benefits within one year after the Effective Date and receive -

      (i) at the reconsideration level, a res judicata denial based on the prior denial referred to in paragraph 8(a)(1)(A); or

      (ii) at the initial level, a res judicata denial based on the prior denial referred to in paragraph 8(a)(2)(A) above.

    The Plaintiff Class excludes those individuals who (1) have already received a subsequent award of benefits with respect to the same time period as the denial identified in paragraph 8(a) or 8(b) above; or (2) appealed, or appeal, all of their denials to an Administrative Law Judge, the Appeals Council, or a court; or (3) have received a determination on reconsideration from the NDDS after February 8, 1999, covering the same time period as the denial identified in paragraph 8(a)(1)(A) above; or (4) have received an initial determination from the NDDS after January 1, 2000, covering the same time period as the denial identified in paragraph 8(a)(2)(A) above; or (5) applied for children's benefits, regardless of whether they applied under Title II or Title XVI, or both; or (6) are not eligible for relief for reasons unrelated to disability.

  2. The only modification effected by the above amendment is to change the second date in paragraph 8(a)(1)(B) from “July 1, 2000” to “October 31, 2000”.

  3. This amendment does not modify any other provision or deadline of the Settlement Agreement.

* * * *

APPROVED ON BEHALF OF PLAINTIFFS:

__________/s/_____________________ _____________/s/__________________

MAX SCHOTT
THOMAS A. KRAUSE
Max Schott and Associates, P.C.
6959 University Avenue
Des Moines, IA 50311-5409
Telephone: (515) 277-4727

TIMOTHY J. CUDDIGAN, #10857
LISA M. LINE, #20105
Brodkey, Cuddigan, Peebles & Kaplan
444 Regency Parkway Drive, Suite 200
Omaha, NE 68114-3755
Telephone: (402) 397-2000

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS
Date: June 9, 2000 Date: June 9, 2000

APPROVED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT DOUGLAS WILLMAN, DIRECTOR OF NEBRASKA DISABILITY DETERMINATIONS SERVICE:

DON STENBERG, #14023
Attorney General

______________/s/_________________
CHARLOTTE R. KORANDA, #19326
Assistant Attorney General
2115 State Capitol
Lincoln, NE 68509-8920
Telephone: (402) 471-3824

Date: June 9, 2000

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT DOUGLAS WILLMAN, DIRECTOR OF NEBRASKA DISABILITY DETERMINATIONS SERVICE

APPROVED ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT KENNETH S. APFEL, UNITED STATES COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY:

DAVID W. OGDEN
Acting Assistant Attorney General
THOMAS J. MONAGHAN
United States Attorney
PAUL D. BOESHART #10365
Assistant United States Attorney
487 Federal Building
100 Centennial Mall North
Lincoln, Nebraska 68508
Telephone: (402) 437-5241

____________/s/___________________
RICHARD G. LEPLEY
W. SCOTT SIMPSON

Attorneys, Department of Justice
Federal Programs Branch
Civil Division - Room 986
Post Office Box 883
Washington, DC 20044
Telephone: (202) 514-3495

Date: June 9, 2000

OF COUNSEL:

KRISTI A. SCHMIDT
Assistant Regional Counsel
Office of the General Counsel, Region VII
U.S. Social Security Administration

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT KENNETH S. APFEL, UNITED STATES COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY