What's Hot in Workers' Comp - News and Results*

RESULTS*

Mike Duffy (King of Prussia, PA) successfully defended a reinstatement petition wherein the claimant alleged he was entitled to reinstatement of indemnity after he voluntarily stopped working due to hand pain. Mike argued the available light-duty position was a one-handed position, and he presented employer fact witness testimony and video of the light-duty job in rebuttal.

Adam Huber and Kristy Salvitti (Mount Laurel, NJ) successfully defended a claim petition wherein the petitioner was not prosecuting his claim as evidenced by his failure to respond to repeated discovery requests. The judge agreed that the petitioner was not complying with the New Jersey workers' compensation rules and granted the respondent’s request for dismissal, entering an order for dismissal without prejudice.

Tony Natale (Philadelphia, PA) successfully defeated a claim petition filed against a medical device fabrication company located in Chester County. The claimant alleged both pulmonary and physical injuries as a result of work-place exposure to chemicals and heavy lifting of product. Cross examination of the claimant forced her to admit that her treating physicians found her symptoms to be psychosomatic. Evidence presented by a nationally renowned pulmonary expert along with a board certified orthopedic surgeon demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that the claimant sustained no identifiable work-related injuries of any kind. The claim petition was summarily dismissed.

Andrea Rock (Philadelphia, PA) successfully prosecuted a termination petition and defended a claimant’s review petition. The judge specifically found that the IME doctor was more credible than the claimant’s treating physician and the claimant. 

Kacey Wiedt (Harrisburg, PA) successfully defended a claim petition in a case where the claimant was struck by a forklift. The claimant alleged the accident caused a back injury. Through employer witness testimony and medical testimony, Kacey was able to show that the claimant did not sustain a back injury and that her medical issues are pre-existing and unrelated to the accident. The judge found that the evidentiary evidence presented by the employer established that, even though the claimant was involved in a forklift incident, she did not sustain a work injury and her ongoing medical issues are unrelated to the forklift accident. 

*Prior Results Do Not Guarantee A Similar Outcome
 

_{What’s Hot in Workers’ Comp 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 © 2022 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.}