Ross M. Goren

Successfully defended against a Claim and Penalty Petition for a significant low back injury wherein the claimant underwent surgery during the litigation and before the IME. The Workers' Compensation Judge denied the Claim and Penalty Petitions outright finding the claimant not credible. The judge relied heavily on the inconsistencies noted during cross-examination of the claimant and believed the employer’s theory that this was an incident, not disabling injury, which was supported by fact witness testimony. The judge also found the claimant’s expert not credible, noting the expert’s opinion was based upon an inaccurate understanding of the medical history. As a result, our client was not responsible for any wage loss benefits, medical bills including surgery, or litigation costs, resulting in savings of well over $150,000 in back-due benefits.

Defended against a Claim and Penalty Petition and prevailed on a Termination Petition involving an upper extremity injury, surgical treatment, and serial bureau documents. The Workers’ Compensation Judge found the claimant not credible, outright noting the inconsistencies between the claimant’s testimony on cross-examination and the objective medical and gym records. The Workers’ Compensation Judge also found the claimant’s expert not credible, outright also noting that the expert’s opinion was based upon inaccurate understanding of the medical history. As a result, our client was not responsible for any wage loss nor the surgery the claimant underwent and was able to avoid potential significant medical exposure moving forward.

Successfully defended a Claim Petition alleging a low back and right arm injuries with ongoing disability. The case involved factual, legal, and medical issues. The Workers’ Compensation Judge denied the Claim Petition outright finding that the claimant was not credible and did not sustain a work injury. Specifically, the Judge found the claimant’s allegations incredulous when considering the inconsistencies between his testimony and the fact witnesses as well as his evasiveness on cross-examination. As a result, the employer was not responsible for any wage loss benefits, medical bills, or litigation costs, resulting in savings of nearly $100,000.

Successfully defended a Claim Petition involving significant wage loss and medical exposure due to multiple trauma surgeries and post-surgical complications. The case was bi-furcated to address a course and scope issue. The Workers’ Compensation Judge found that the claimant was not in the course and scope of employment and denied the Claim Petition. As a result, the employer was not responsible for over $150,000 of hospital bills as well as significant ongoing medical and wage loss exposure.

Successfully prosecuted a Termination Petition and defended against a Review Petition for a more expansive description of the injury and surgical treatment that the claimant underwent during the litigation. The Workers’ Compensation Judge granted the Termination Petition and denied the Review Petition on the basis that the claimant was not credible and that employer’s medical experts were more credible than the claimant’s treating surgeon. The Workers’ Compensation Judge stopped all medical and wage loss benefits related to the accepted injury and found that the employer was not responsible for any medical benefits related to the Review Petition including the surgery the claimant underwent during the course of the litigation. The employer obtained a sizeable supersedeas fund recovery and did not have to pay any of the outstanding medical bills.

Successfully defended a Claim Petition, alleging a head injury and psychological injuries with ongoing disability. The Workers’ Compensation Judge denied the Claim Petition finding that Claimant was not credible and did not sustain a work-related injury. As a result, the employer was not responsible for any of the medical bills or wage loss benefits.

Successfully obtained multiple Petitions to Enforce Subpoenas of various pharmacies in the Court of Common Pleas in connection with various Penalty Petitions and Fee Reviews involving suspected physician self-referral issues. Enforcement of these subpoenas has often time led to various successful outcomes in those settings resulting in significant savings with respect to potential medical exposure.