Many clients, and even doctors treating injured workers, are uncertain how a case disputed by the Insurance Company will be decided by the Court. Typically, an insurance company will send the claimant to one of their doctors for a single, very quick, examination. This is called an Independent Medical Examination (IME), or more properly, a Defense Medical Examination (DME). Based on his or her limited information, this ?independent? doctor may express medical opinions in direct conflict with opinions stated by one or more treating physicians who may have vastly greater information about and contact with the injured worker. These clients and treating doctors are genuinely surprised when the insurance company challenges their opinions, and even more so to learn that a Judge could find the insurance company?s expert to be ?more credible.?
One of the most basic concepts of Pennsylvania Workers? Compensation law is that a Judge is the finder of fact, and has authority to believe or reject any testimony, including medical experts. The only condition is that the Judge state reasons for believing and rejecting the various items of evidence presented. Those reasons must be based on the evidence presented, personal observations of a witness made by the Judge, logic and /or common sense. The Appeal Court will not consider the evidence for the purpose of reaching its own conclusion. The Appeal Court is limited to determining if the ?reasons? stated by the Judge are sufficient.
Simply arguing that the Judge believed the wrong evidence will not support an Appeal. Just because the Judge ?could have? reached a different conclusion if they believed the evidence you presented is irrelevant. In every lawsuit there is a winner ? and a loser. The losing party always believes the Judge made a mistake. For an Appeal to succeed, the party appealing must prove the Judge misstated the evidence, or applied reasons that are contradicted by any and all possible interpretations of the evidence. This process applies to both the claimant?s and the employer?s insurance company. In summary, it means that the proper presentation of credible, believable evidence before the Judge is crucial, because it is extremely difficult to convince an Appellate Court to overturn a decision of a Judge.
?Proper? presentation of evidence is more than merely asking the right questions of a given witness, and having the witness respond with the ?correct? answer. Virtually any lawyer with a checklist can ask the right questions. Rather, it means revealing your client to the Court as a real human being with a real problem ? beyond mere rehearsed answers to pre-prepared questions. It means ?knowing? your own client, and everything about their Workers? Compensation case. It means learning the medical issues that affect your client, in order to generate a compelling explanation from your medical expert ? rather than standard checklist type answers. The ?Art of Advocacy? on behalf of your client means that the lawyer should paint a picture for the Judge, showing the Judge why they should believe your client.
Philadelphia Work Injury Attorneys at Schmidt, Kirifides & Fridkin Have the Experience to Win Your Workers? Compensation Case
If you have been injured as a result of a work-related accident, you need an attorney with the knowledge, skill and compassion necessary to present the Court with the Big Picture, and win your case. The Work Injury Lawyers at Schmidt, Kirifides & Fridkin each have over 20 years of experience representing injured workers. For a FREE consultation, call us at 877-268-6466 or contact us online. With offices in Philadelphia and Media, Pennsylvania, as well as Wilmington, Delaware, we have a location convenient for you.
daytona 500 national pancake day ohio school shooting sean young arrested matt kenseth bridge to nowhere primary results
No comments:
Post a Comment