What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp - News and Results*
RESULTS*
Tony Natale (King of Prussia, PA) successfully prosecuted a termination petition. The claimant, a police officer for the borough, sustained a work injury to the neck, back and lower extremities in the form of aggravations of pre-existing conditions. The claimant testified that he only treated sporadically for the pre-existing condition before the work injury and that his treatment intensified greatly after the work injury. To the contrary, the treatment records showed the claimant regularly treated for his medical conditions three times a week prior to the work injury, all the way up to two days before the work injury. The claimant’s expert was unaware of the prior treatment, and on cross examination Tony was able to force the expert to agree that the claimant’s base-line condition was equivalent to the current symptomatology. As such, the court granted the full recovery as the claimant reached base line and fully recovered from the work aggravation.
Rachel Ramsay-Lowe and Bill Murphy (both of Roseland, NJ) received dismissal without prejudice. The petitioner alleged a motor vehicle accident on May 5, 2024, resulting in injuries to her neck, back, left side of her body and her left arm. A motion was filed to dismiss for lack of employment, arguing that the petitioner was never in the employment of our insured. The motion was unopposed, and on November 25, 2025, the judge ordered dismissal of the claim for lack of employment.
Anna Robertelli and Bill Murphy (both of Roseland, NJ) received dismissal without prejudice. The petitioner alleged occupational exposure from October 2013 to October 2023, resulting in orthopedic and neurologic injuries to his right arm, hand and wrist, including but not limited to carpal tunnel syndrome. Following the petitioner’s failure to timely respond to our discovery requests, a motion to dismiss was filed for lack of prosecution. On December 8, 2025, the judge entered an order for dismissal for lack of prosecution.
Michael Duffy (King of Prussia, PA) and Alana Staniszewski (Pittsburgh, PA) were successful in having a Claim Petition denied where the claimant avered he sustained work-related chemical burns. The claimant testified that while working for the employer, he sat on an overturned trash can to take a brief break before clocking out. After getting up, he noticed his pants and underwear were wet. He punched out and walked to his apartment about a block away. He undressed, took a shower, and noticed his buttocks burning. He put a cream on it, but it became worse. The next morning he sought medical treatment. He was hospitalized from August 3, 2024, until September 3, 2024, as he had second degree chemical burns on his buttocks and the back of his thighs. He received an incision, debridement, and soft tissue necrosis procedure to his perineum, buttock and left thigh. The claimant eventually was released to return to work without restrictions and found fully recovered by his doctor. No medical testimony was submitted. The claimant submitted medical records and relied upon a one-page report opining that his burns were related to sitting on a wet trash can. No details were provided regarding any specific exposure to chemicals. We presented fact witness testimony detailing the claimant’s job duties and exposure to chemicals which revealed the claimant was not exposed to any hazardous chemicals, only normal cleaning supplies. Video footage submitted revealed the claimant sitting on the trash can, getting up, moving to another trash can, and then leaving without issue; he never looked at his pants or felt his pants to see if they were wet. The workers’ compensation judge found the claimant’s testimony not credible because he would expect the claimant to try to touch his pants, look at it, or dry it off. He did not find the claimant credible regarding showering and then sleeping with the burning sensation before seeking treatment 16 or more hours later. The judge also found the employer’s fact witness credible. He did not find the claimant’s one-page medical report credible as this claimant’s expert opinion was cursory and provided no explanation other than merely relying on the claimant’s history. Thus, the claim petition was denied and dismissed.
Michael Duffy (King of Prussia, PA) successfully settled a case with no admission of liability and a settlement of $24,500 with no payment of medical bills. The claimant, a mason, alleged he sustained a stroke while at work. The claimant reported to work in the morning, although he told his supervisors he was not feeling well. He was provided an apprentice and told to take it easy. He went to the bathroom multiple times and then asked to leave early. He left after about two to three hours of working. He then went to the hospital, was discharged, and then went back. When he returned, he was told he had a stroke. He was hospitalized for a period of time and then discharged with out-of-work restrictions. His expert testified that the claimant’s job duties as a mason caused his stroke. Specifically, this expert alleged the claimant’s job was physically demanding, he was regularly exposed to concrete dust and had stressors from supervising an apprentice, all of which caused his stroke. Our expert testified that the claimant’s stroke was a result of his unregulated hypertension and failure to consistently take his blood pressure medication. The employer’s fact witness testimony revealed the claimant did not supervise any apprentice and wore respirators whenever he was exposed to concrete dust. After completing all evidence, claimant’s counsel presented a demand of $310,000 plus payment of medical bills and reimbursement of litigation costs.
*Prior Results Do Not Guarantee a Similar Outcome
NEWS
Michael R. Duffy (King of Prussia, PA) we recently elected a shareholder of the firm effective January 1, 2026. Mike focuses his practice on defending employers and insurance carriers in matters related to workers’ compensation. He represents employers across numerous industries including trucking, construction, landscaping, manufacturing, hospitality and long-term care. He is a member of the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Coalition, Brehon Law Society, Philadelphia Bar Association and Judge Alexander F. Barbieri Workers’ Compensation Inn of Court. He earned his Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from Pennsylvania State University and his juris doctor from Widener University Delaware Law School. He is admitted to practice in Pennsylvania and New Jersey.
What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp, Vol. 30, No. 1, January 2026, is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. We would be pleased to provide such legal assistance as you require on these and other subjects when called upon. ATTORNEY ADVERTISING pursuant to New York RPC 7.1 Copyright © 2026 Marshall Dennehey, all rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm. For reprints or inquiries, or if you wish to be removed from this mailing list, contact tamontemuro@mdwcg.com.