Bridget Y. Wilson v. Office of Personnel Management
Background
- Appellant Bridget Y. Wilson appealed OPM's denial of her application for survivor annuity benefits; an administrative judge issued an initial decision on Aug 14, 2015, affirming OPM.
- The initial decision stated it would become final on Sept 18, 2015 unless a petition for review (PFR) was filed by that date.
- Wilson filed a PFR on June 29, 2016 — over nine months late — and the Clerk notified her that the filing appeared untimely and requested evidence of timeliness or good cause.
- Wilson submitted medical notes (from 2002–2004), a Feb 27, 2016 hip exam, and a statement alleging a July 2015 concussion with recovery by Nov 2015, claiming medical incapacity prevented timely filing.
- The Board evaluated whether Wilson showed "good cause" for the delay, focusing on medical evidence linking her conditions to inability to file between Sept 2015 and June 2016.
- The Board concluded the submitted evidence did not explain inability to timely file and dismissed the PFR as untimely without good cause, leaving the initial decision as the Board’s final decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Board should waive the PFR filing deadline for good cause | Wilson argued medical conditions (residual effects of a 2002 MVA, chronic pain, partial sciatic paralysis, and a July 2015 concussion) prevented timely filing | Agency opposed the untimely PFR and relied on the record showing no adequate medical link to the delay | Denied — Wilson failed to show good cause; PFR dismissed as untimely |
| Whether submitted medical evidence covered the critical time period | Wilson submitted old notes and a Feb 27, 2016 hip exam and referenced but did not produce July 2015 concussion records | Agency argued the evidence did not show incapacitation during the filing window or explain the delay after alleged recovery | Held not sufficient — evidence did not establish how conditions prevented filing between Sept 2015 and June 2016 |
| Standard for establishing good cause based on illness | Wilson contended her illnesses impaired her ability to file or seek extension | Agency relied on MSPB standards requiring time-period, medical proof, and causal explanation | Held that the Board’s illness standard was not met because Wilson did not identify or document incapacity during the relevant period |
| Whether any other equitable factors (pro se status, length of delay) justified relief | Wilson noted pro se status and ongoing health issues | Agency pointed to long delay and lack of corroborating evidence | Held insufficient — pro se status and chronic conditions without causal proof do not establish good cause |
Key Cases Cited
- Alonzo v. Department of the Air Force, 4 M.S.P.R. 180 (Board 1980) (good-cause waiver requires showing due diligence or ordinary prudence)
- Moorman v. Department of the Army, 68 M.S.P.R. 60 (1995) (Board considers delay length, reasonableness of excuse, pro se status, and evidence of circumstances beyond control)
- Lacy v. Department of the Navy, 78 M.S.P.R. 434 (1998) (illness-based good cause requires timeframe, medical evidence, and explanation of how illness prevented timely filing)
- Smith v. Office of Personnel Management, 117 M.S.P.R. 527 (2012) (detailed medical evidence showing functional impairments can establish good cause)
- Pirkkala v. Department of Justice, 123 M.S.P.R. 288 (2016) (medical condition must be tied to inability to file; lacking that link, untimely filing not excused)