Jurisdictions
Kansas, Missouri, U.S. District Court – Western District of Missouri
U.S. District Court – District of Kansas, U.S. District Court – District of Nebraska
Education
University of Kansas School of Law, University of Kansas, B.A.
Legal team
“No one looks forward to entering the doors of a disability law office. My goal is to leave you with a feeling of relief when you exit – not by making empty promises, but through listening and paying attention to detail.”
Each client that we represent deserves our zealous advocacy. I do not say that lightly. In a prior life, I practiced criminal defense, essentially as a public defender. I continue to believe that the rules of the legal game must be fair and predictable.
After hours I enjoy spending time with my very tolerant wife. As often as I can, I also practice competitive ballroom dance. I am a Kansas City native who was led to the legal profession by high school debate and by playing in too many chess tournaments.
There is nothing more gratifying than meeting the expectations of a client in need. The process can be slow, but it is not hopeless. A client, CY, visited our office looking for help on his disability claims after multiple orthopedic surgeries. Both his disability insurance company and Social Security had denied his claims. After two appeals before the insurance company, it approved CY’s claim. And after a long wait and a Social Security hearing, CY received benefits in full.
Sometimes disability cases require litigation. In employment disability claims (usually for short-term and long-term disability insurance), this litigation is challenging. This area of law is usually more favorable to insurance companies than it is to the little guy. Even so, the law can hold parties accountable. In these two cases, federal judges found that the insurance companies acted unlawfully in administering our clients’ claims:
Brende v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company, No. 15-9711-JAR-TJJ, 2017 WL 4222982 (D. Kan. September 22, 2017).
Derichs v. AT&T Services, Inc., No. 16-2346-JWL, 2018 WL 2134067 (D. Kan. May 9, 2018).”
“No one looks forward to entering the doors of a disability law office. My goal is to leave you with a feeling of relief when you exit – not by making empty promises, but through listening and paying attention to detail.”
Each client that we represent deserves our zealous advocacy. I do not say that lightly. In a prior life, I practiced criminal defense, essentially as a public defender. I continue to believe that the rules of the legal game must be fair and predictable.
After hours I enjoy spending time with my very tolerant wife. As often as I can, I also practice competitive ballroom dance. I am a Kansas City native who was led to the legal profession by high school debate and by playing in too many chess tournaments.
There is nothing more gratifying than meeting the expectations of a client in need. The process can be slow, but it is not hopeless. A client, CY, visited our office looking for help on his disability claims after multiple orthopedic surgeries. Both his disability insurance company and Social Security had denied his claims. After two appeals before the insurance company, it approved CY’s claim. And after a long wait and a Social Security hearing, CY received benefits in full.
Sometimes disability cases require litigation. In employment disability claims (usually for short-term and long-term disability insurance), this litigation is challenging. This area of law is usually more favorable to insurance companies than it is to the little guy. Even so, the law can hold parties accountable. In these two cases, federal judges found that the insurance companies acted unlawfully in administering our clients’ claims:
Brende v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company, No. 15-9711-JAR-TJJ, 2017 WL 4222982 (D. Kan. September 22, 2017).
Derichs v. AT&T Services, Inc., No. 16-2346-JWL, 2018 WL 2134067 (D. Kan. May 9, 2018).”
(816) 781-4836
