May 07, 2008 : Shawn C. Gooden Wins Workers Compensation Cases
Harrisburg associate Shawn C. Gooden has earned three recent victories in contested worker’s compensation cases. In the first, the Claimant sustained a serious injury to her ankle. She underwent surgery but was released to return to work. Light duty was offered. Then, one day while at work, claimant began to experience vertigo, dizziness and nausea. She left work and never returned. Due to a clerical error, benefits were not properly suspended upon claimant’s return to work. Benefits were therefore reinstated upon her departure form the work force and a Petition to Suspend was filed. Evidence was presented from the employer that Claimant’s modified duty job permitted her to sit during her entire shift, she needed only to file paperwork and perform translation services. However, Claimant testified that she was required to walk long distances and climb stairs. To address the conflict in the testimony, we invited the judge to tour the facility. As a result, the judge was able to see first hand the claimant’s work environment including the distances traversed during her shift. As a result, the judge found the employer witness more credible than the claimant. Claimant also filed a Petition to Review seeking to amend the description of injury to include her vertigo, dizziness and depression. Both parties presented experts. The judge found the defense expert more credible than claimant’s expert because claimant’s psychiatrist relied on the claimant’s history which the judge rejected as not credible. The victory resulted in significant savings for the self-insured employer as claimant was receiving $17,940 annually in indemnity benefits.
In the second matter, a provider filed a petition to review a UR determination and claimant filed a penalty petition. Oddly, the provider was seeking compensation for his verification of the records sent to the URO for the UR review. The judge quickly dismissed the Petition to Review and the Penalty Petition concluding that the provider did not have standing to bring either petition.
In the third, Claimant sustained a low back injury. She was able to return to work but then developed foot pain. The foot pain was not accepted as compensable. An IME was performed and the doctor found that Claimant suffered from plantar fasciitis, which was related to the work injury. About the same time, claimant was released to her regular duty job and her job was offered to her. She did not return. Several attempts were made to resolve the case by accepting the foot injury but suspending benefits as of the date claimant was released to work. Claimant refused to so stipulate despite several suggestions that she would do so. Therefore, the employer was forced to depose her treating doctor. During the deposition, the doctor testified that Claimant was fully recovered. A termination petition was filed based upon the doctors testimony. Ultimately, the judge granted both the suspension and termination petitions. Claimant earned a very high average weekly wage and this decision saved the employer over $35,000 per year in indemnity exposure.
File Under: Results, Workers' Compensation, Shawn C. Gooden