We just completed a brief workers' compensation hearing involving a complex claim for an injury that occurred nearly 40 years ago. Needless to say, it has been a journey for our client, who is endured several surgeries, and many life adjustments.
The issues in this case centered around the relationship between recent medical care and the original injury that occurred decades ago. In many cases, this kind of issue is decided by expert medical opinions. In our particular case, several insurance company retained doctors actually support our claim, but the employer is still resisting responsibility for the recent treatment
Medical opinions in a case like this are essential. The injured worker's testimony is secondary, and the many times is aimed at putting the doctor's opinion in context. Some people argue that the injured worker does not really need to testify at these kinds of hearings. We do not.
Our client has been through quite a bit over these past decades, and his story does a lot of things. Telling the story of the case complements the cold and hard medical evidence in the file. An injured worker's testimony can also explain decisions about seeking treatment, or not.
Probably most important however, is that our client's testimony humanizes the case. I noticed that our Administrative Law Judge in today's case listened intently to our client, and wanted to know a lot about his journey.
Too learn about how workers' compensation hearings were, check out this article.
