In New York workers’ compensation litigation, a conceded IME on causal relationship can feel like an impossible setback to surmount. But at Lois Law Firm, we know the truth: causal relationship is only as strong as the facts it rests on. And when those facts crumble, so does the claim.
That’s exactly what happened when LOIS Associate Doug Chau and Paralegal Jeannie Borschell secured a full disallowance of a right hip claim—despite an IME concession and the preclusion of the employer’s only witness.
On paper, the claim seemed straightforward: a worker alleged a hip injury while lifting a 130-pound box. But creativity in defense begins where others give up. LOIS dug deeper and found a pattern that trial lawyers recognize immediately — a shifting mechanism of injury. Across medical reports, the claimant’s story subtly—but consistently—changed. Early treatment records? They focused on low back complaints, not the hip.
That’s where advocacy through precision took over.
During deposition, the PFME doctor made critical concessions: he could not clearly define the mechanism of injury, imaging showed no structural or acute traumatic damage, and—most importantly—he had not reviewed the full medical record. In New York practice, medical opinions grounded in incomplete or inaccurate histories are vulnerable—and often fatal.
But LOIS didn’t stop at the medicine.
In a move that exemplifies creativity and relentless service, the team introduced dashcam footage capturing the claimant immediately after the alleged incident—walking normally and casually telling a co-worker he planned to install a swimming pool the next day. That single piece of evidence reframed the entire case.
At hearing, cross-examination did the rest.
Confronted with his own inconsistent statements, the claimant became evasive—undermining his credibility at every turn. And in workers’ compensation, as in all trial practice, credibility is currency.
The summation was surgical: highlight the shifting narratives, underscore the lack of objective findings, expose the incomplete medical foundation, and anchor everything to the claimant’s credibility failure.
The result? The Law Judge found the claimant not credible and held that the medical opinions relied on an inaccurate history of accident—a decisive principle in New York workers’ compensation law.
The claim was fully disallowed.
No indemnity exposure. No medical liability. No compromise.
This is professionalism under pressure — winning not because the facts were easy, but because the team made them undeniable. At LOIS, we don’t just respond to claims — we test them, challenge them, and when warranted, dismantle them completely.
