Making Lives Better
After Accidents

Case Results

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 $121,000.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 of his employer for over 21 years. He was injured within the course and scope of his employment. The insurance company disputed the extent of the 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 included 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 extended to include a herniated nucleus pulposus at L5-S1 and radiculopathy. As a result, the claimant was entitled to medical treatment and was able to get the surgery that 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, was not intoxicated at the time of the accident and had a disability that was the result of 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 and 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 a company and was injured in the course and scope of his employment. Insurance company disputed the extent of the claimant’s low back injury to include lumbar disc herniation at L5-S1 and lumbar radiculopathy. Insurance carrier also disputed claimant’s ability to earn his pre-injury wages as a result of his injury from September 5, 2009, to the present as a result of his work-related injury. The insurance also claimed that it could take credit for a job offer the employer made to the 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, the 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 the carrier could not take credit. As a result, the injured worker was entitled to reasonable and necessary medical care for his disc herniation at L5-S1 and lumbar radiculopathy and lost wage/income benefits from September 5, 2009, to the present, and the carrier is not allowed to take credit for wages that the 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 there were no medical reports to support that this was an on-the-job injury. Insurance carrier also indicated that the injured worker’s inability 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 a 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 is entitled to lost wage/income benefits from May 5, 2007, to the present.