 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Baptist Hospital East v. Jones12/16/2004
benefits for various periods after January, 2000.
Dr. Bilkey began treating the claimant for back pain on February 1, 2000. His treatment notes included a history of both work-related injuries and noted that the pain did not fully resolve following the September, 1999, incident. He last saw the claimant on November 30, 2001, at which time she continued to use a TENS unit and Darvocet for pain management. She reported that she was working full-time, performing light-duty work.
Dr. Glassman saw the claimant from December, 2000, through September, 2001. Although he discussed the possibility of surgery at various times, he recommended conservative therapy. On the last visit, he recommended a course of epidural blocks.
Dr. Wood evaluated the claimant on October 23, 2000, and conducted an extensive review of her medical records. He diagnosed low back pain and lumbar spondylosis without myelopathy but was of the opinion that the subjective complaints were inconsistent with the objective medical findings and suggested symptom magnification. He concluded that the claimant's primary injury occurred in September, 1999, and that the January, 2000 incident caused merely an exacerbation of that pre existing active problem. Furthermore, he found no causal relationship between her current complaints and the incident. He agreed with Dr. Bilkey that the claimant reached maximum medical improvement (MMI) as of May 30, 2000, and concluded that her AMA impairment was 5%. He thought that she could perform at least sedentary work.
Although Dr. Lehmann saw the claimant on April 11, 2000, and noted the January, 2000, incident, the Form 107 that he later prepared referred only to the 1999 injury . He diagnosed severe degenerative disc disease at L5-6 and indicated that the injury was the cause of the claimant's present complaints. In his opinion, the claimant did not have an active impairment before the injury, and her condition was not due to the arousal of a pre-existing condition. In November, 2000, he assigned various work restrictions and also assigned a 20% whole-body impairment"according to the guidelines of the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons."
After the January, 2000, incident, the claimant was unable to perform the strenuous work of a nurse's aide. She testified that although she was given clerical duties, she frequently missed work and was required to use sick and personal leave. The employer terminated her on January 15, 2002. On that same day, she filed an application regarding the January 16, 2000, injury .
The employer's Form 111 notice of denial or acceptance asserted, "This claim is compensable, as it relates to the 01 /16/ 00 injury , but there is a dispute concerning whether the 01/16/00 injury caused any permanent disability." At the benefit review conference, the parties stipulated that the employer had paid voluntary TTD benefits at various times in 2000 and also paid $11,385.25 in medical benefits. The contested issues included extent and duration, duration of TTD, pre-existing active, and causation of disability. As noted by the Court of Appeals, both parties presented the ALJ with "all or nothing" theories of the case.
In her brief, the claimant was steadfast in asserting that her present disability was due to the January, 2000, incident. She maintained that the September, 1999, accident resulted in pain on the right side of her back; that she was able to continue performing her usual work after a brief period of light duty; that the January, 2000, accident affected her left side; and that her present disability "was not due to the September 16, 1999, incident or to any other prior back injury ."
The employer
Page 1 2 3 4 Kentucky Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE
|