Battle of Expert
Witnesses: Court Rules Worker is Feigning Injury
[Posted 10/28/2008]
A truck
driver in Pennsylvania was injured unloading his
truck in 1995 and was granted full disability
benefits. In 2003, the employer contended the
trucker had fully recovered from his injuries and
should no longer be receiving workers’ compensation.
The request was denied, even though the Workers’
Compensation Judge at the time voiced reservations
on the quality of the medical evidence presented by
the worker.
The employer filed a second termination petition in
2004, and following a lengthy adjudication, the
termination was granted in October, 2008.
This case points out the difficulty in
proving/disproving a worker’s recovery from injuries
sustained on the job. Physicians and testing can
certainly appear to support the worker’s claim that
he has not recovered. Yet different physicians and
testing processes can also support that the worker’s
injuries have mended and that current symptoms are
unsubstantiated. The Court opinion stated each case
must be judged individually
“[b]ecause
every case presents a different factual scenario.”
The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court concluded the “claimant
was feigning symptoms that were not outwardly
visible”
and ruled in favor of the employer. The Court
rejected the claimant’s contention that an employer
cannot prove cessation of pain unless the injured
party acknowledges it as so.
The
lawyer for the claimant has announced he will appeal
to the state Supreme Court.
Related Links:
PlanSponsor News Article
(free
login required)
Court Opinion: Folmer v. WC Appeal Board
Go to News
Summary Page:
Health-related News Summaries