LOIS Associate Natalia Verde obtained a disallowance in a New York Workers’ Compensation case by pointing out the many inconsistencies in the reporting of the mechanism of injury. The Claimant reported initially that she was lifting an excessive amount of weight to lift up a tipped-over dumpster, injuring her neck. Deposition testimony revealed that no physician personally examined the Claimant. At the trial, Verde questioned the Claimant as to the mechanism of injury listed on the initial medical report, and the Claimant testified that she told the doctor when she was being discharged and that is probably why it is not in the medical report. Verde then confronted the Claimant as to why the subsequent medical reports also did not mention any injury caused by the alleged dumpster incident, to which the Claimant had no response. Verde presented two employer-witnesses, who testified as to the lack of any notice until the month after the alleged accident.
Verde ultimately argued that the Claimant’s testimony was incredible and that there was no accident within the course and scope of employment, untimely notice, and no causal relationship based on the totality of the record. Verde also further requested preclusion of the medical reports. The Law Judge issued a Reserved Decision, disallowing the claim in its entirety. The Law Judge found that there were too many inconsistencies in the medical reports when compared to the Claimant’s testimony. The Law Judge highlighted the fact that while the Claimant is claiming an injury due to lifting a heavy dumpster, neither of the first two medical reports mention the dumpster, which creates a credibility issue that the Claimant did not overcome.
