Case Results

DISPUTED INJURY ON THE JOB - Injured worker (IW) sustained two on the job injuries in a three-week period. The insurance carrier (IC) denied both claims. The IW had attempted to handle the claim herself and met fierce resistance from the IC. After hiring our firm, within 3 months, IW went to a contested case hearing and administrative law judge found for IW. The hearing officer found specifically, Claimant sustained a compensable injury on both dates of injury claimed. Claimant had disability resulting from the compensable injury of date of injury, day after injury to through the date of the hearing. As a result of this decision IW will received all reasonable and necessary medical treatment for the work-related injury recommended by her treating doctor. IW will also receive temporary income benefits (wage replacement) from the day after the injury to present.
.........................................................

UNDERPAYMENT OF INCOME BENEFITS – IW worked two jobs prior to on the job injury. As a result of the job injury IW was unable to work both jobs due to physical limitations from injury. IC refused to include the wages from both employers as required by law. After hiring our firm IW’s wages were increased to include the wages from both jobs and received back pay for the underpayment of income benefits. This resulted in more money weekly to IW.
.........................................................

MMI/IR DISPUTE – Prior to our officer representation, IW was placed at MMI in May of 2015 and given a 0% impairment rating. As a result of this certification IW as not receiving income benefits nor medical treatment. After hiring this firm, we were able to show the designated doctor was not qualified to examine IW due to IW’s type of injury. A new designated doctor was appointment and IW was placed not at MMI. IW’s weekly income benefits began again and he was give back pay for the time period he was not paid. As of January 2017 IW is still receiving income benefits.
.........................................................

EXTENT OF INJURY MMI DISPUTE – IC disputed the severity of the IW’s on the job injury. The IC had a doctor chosen on their behalf find the injury was a minor injury and IW was at MMI. The IC chosen doctor testified on the IC behalf at the CCH. After a contested case hearing the hearing officer found: The compensable injury does extend to and include left carpal tunnel syndrome, left radial neuritis and left ulnar nerve injury; Claimant has not reached maximum medical improvement; and the issue of impairment rating cannot be determined at this time, since the date of maximum medical improvement has not been determined. This resulted in IW receiving additional lost wage income benefits and receiving all reasonable and necessary medical treatment for the above injuries.
.........................................................

DISPUTED INJURY ON THE JOB – IW injured his back changing a tire. IC contended the IW did not injure himself of the job but had pre-existed condition despite the IW being able to perform his job without any problems prior to the date of injury. After a Contested Case Hearing, the hearing officer found IW did injure his back on the job. As a result, the IW is now able to seek treatment for his lower back injury.
.........................................................

DEATH CLAIM - Injured worker was found deceased in his kitchen overseas. Insurance carrier denied the claim. After a CCH, it was found employee was in the course and scope of employment. As a result of this decision, employee' family received 78 weeks of back pay in lump sum along with interest based on the employee's average weekly wage. The children of the employee will receive income benefits to the age of 18 and longer if registered as full time student in an accredited institution. The spouse will receive income benefits until she remarries.
.........................................................

EXTENT OF INJURY - Insurance carrier disputed right carpal tunnel syndrome. As a result of the contested case hearing, it was found the right CTS was related to the work injury. The injured worker is now entitled to all reasonable and necessary medical treatment for the right CTS as a result of this decision.
.........................................................

IMPAIRMENT RATING DISPUTE - Claimant was originally placed at MMI prior to our representation. As a results of our efforts, claimant was given a new certification of 32% impairment which results in back pay of lost wages for 26 weeks (prior MMI date to new MMI date) and impairment income benefits for 96 weeks. Injured employee is not entitled to apply and qualify for Sibs which could result in payment of income benefits for up to 401 weeks from his date of injury.
.........................................................

DISPUTED CLAIM - The insurance carrier denied Claimant’s weekly benefits when he was injured on the job and was unable to return to work because of his injury. Due to our efforts of requesting a designated doctor and scheduling a contested case hearing, he received weekly benefits from the date he began missing time from work until his statutory MMI date and he is now receiving impairment rating benefits due to his permanent impairment from the work injury. IW will received 135 weeks of income benefits during the course of our representation.
.........................................................

EXTENT MMI IR DISPUTE – The IC disputed extent of injury and temporary income benefits payments to the injured worker. IC based nonpayment of tibs based on an offer of work by the employer. Our office argued the offer of employment did not meet the legal requirements. The hearing officer found the following: the compensable injury extends to and includes aggravation of annular L4- L5 disc bulge and lumbar radiculitis, Claimant has not reached maximum medical improvement, since Claimant has not reached maximum medical improvement, the issue of impairment rating is not yet ripe for adjudication, Claimant had disability from September 25, 2015 through the date of the hearing resulting for the compensable injury, and Employer did not make a bona fide offer of employment to Claimant; Carrier is therefore not entitled to adjust post-injury weekly earnings. As a result of this decision, IW will receive reasonable and medical treatment for the injury above and full income benefits for the time he missed from work.
.........................................................

If you find yourself in any one of these situation please contact my office to see if we can assist you.
.........................................................

Personal Injury Case Results:
Client was injured in an automobile accident injuring her right knee and right shoulder. After paying attorney fees and all medical expenses client received $92,342.78.

Client injured her lower back in an automobile accident. The client received a $121,000.00

Client was injured at work and after paying attorney fees, all liens, and medical expenses client received $73,220.25

Client’s mother was killed in a tragic automobile accident. After the claim was initially disputed, the claim settled for a confidential amount.

Husband and wife were involved in a motor vehicle accident and the case settled for a confidential amount.
.........................................................

Claimant was an employee for over 21 years for his employer. He was injured within the course and scope of his employment. The insurance company disputed the extent of Claimant's injury to include L5-S1 herniated nucleus pulposus and radiculopathy. The Claimant was evaluated by a designated doctor who determined that the compensable injury includes a lumbar sprain/strain, L5-S1 herniated nucleus pulposus and radiculopathy.

After a Benefit Contested Case Hearing, the hearing officer found that the compensable injury extends to include a hernicated nucleus pulposus at L5-S1 and radiculopathy. As a result the Claimant is entitled to medical treatment and was able to get the surgery his doctor had recommended.
.........................................................

Claimant was involved in a motor vehicle accident. The Claimant left his house in the company vehicle in response to a repair call and while on the way to the customer's home was involved in a car accident. The Claimant sprained his shoulder and fractured his right foot due to the accident. The insurance company disputed that the injured worker was in the course and scope of his employment at the time of the accident, stated that the Claimant was intoxicated at the time of the accident, relieving the carrier of liability, and disputed the Claimant's ability to earn his pre-injury wages from October 8, 2009 through the present.

After a Benefit Contested Case Hearing the hearing officer found that the Claimant was in the course and scope of employment at the time of the accident, the Claimant was not intoxicated at the time of the accident, and the Claimant had disability resulting from the compensable injury from October 8, 2009 through the date of the hearing. As a result the Claimant was entitled to reasonable and necessary medical treatment, lost income benefits from October 8, 2009 to the present, and the carrier was not relieved from liability because the Claimant was not intoxicated at the time of the accident.
.........................................................

Claimant was an 18 year employee of company and was injured in the course and scope of his employment. Insurance company disputed the extent of claimant's low back injury to include lumbar disc herniation at L5-S1 and lumbar radiculopathy. Insurance carrier also disputed Claimant ability to earn his pre-injury wages as a result of his injury from September 5, 2009 to present as a result of his work related injury. The insurance also claimed they could take credit for a job offer employer made to injured worker.

After a benefit contested case hearing, the hearing officer found the following: The injured worker's work related injury extended to include lumbar disc herniation at L5-S1 and lumbar radiculopathy, injured worker was unable to work or earn his pre-injury wages as a result of his work related injury, and the employer's job offer did not comply with Rule 129.6 and carrier could not take credit. As a result, the injured worker is entitled to reasonable and necessary medical care for his disc herniation at L5-S1 and lumbar radiculopathy, entitled to lost wage/income benefits from September 5, 2009 to the present, and carrier is not allowed to take credit for wages injured worker would have earned as a result of the employer's invalid job offer.
.........................................................

The injured worker worked as a welder for a company and was injured in the course and scope of his employment. On the day the injured worker got injured, he was severely burned and ended up having his foot amputated as a result of the injury. Insurance company disputed that the injury was caused in the course and scope of employment, and tried to claim that his injury was a result of his diabetic condition. The Insurance Carrier also tried to claim that the injured worker's testimony of how the injury occurred was inconsistent and that there were no medical reports to support that this was an on the job injury. Insurance carrier also indicated that the injured workers in ability to earn his pre-injury wages and work was a result of his diabetic condition and not as a result of his work related injury. This left the injured worker without medical benefits or income for months.

After a benefit contested case hearing, the hearing officer found the following: The injured worker sustained a compensable injury on May 3, 2007 and the injured worker had disability from May 5, 2007 and continuing. As a result, the injured worker is entitled to reasonable and necessary medical care for foot amputation and entitled to lost wage/income benefits from May 5, 2007 to the present.