 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Scozzari v. Montana Schools Group Insurance Authority2/17/2004
nder no circumstances would his office been left unstaffed and unlocked.
The initial factual question presented in this case is therefore whether the claimant in fact left a written claim for compensation in Sullivan's box as she claims. Based on my evaluation of claimant's credibility and the credibility of both Sullivan and Strizich, I find that claimant did not leave a written claim in Sullivan's box on November 18, 2000, or at any other time, and that she in fact never filled out the form despite Sullivan's urging that she do so. I also do not believe her testimony concerning statements by Sullivan and Strizich in 2003 that could be viewed as indicating their knowledge that she had previously filed a claim. Sullivan and Strizich denied making the statements and they were the more credible witnesses.
In reaching these findings, I have not only relied on my own perception of the claimant and her testimony at trial but also on other facts and circumstances which lend support to my perception. I note initially that claimant admits she did not want to pursue a workers' compensation claim. As outlined below, other evidence fails to support her claim that she had a change of heart.
Claimant saw her family practitioner, Dr. Shelly Castles, on November 30, 2000, less than two weeks after her fall. The visit was unrelated to claimant's fall and Dr. Castles' office note does not mention any fall. (Ex. 6 at 37.) But claimant testified at trial that she told Dr. Castles about the fall, thus suggesting that Dr. Castle's notes were inaccurate or at least incomplete. This is just one of several inconsistencies between what she claims she told her physicians and what is recorded in her medical records.
Claimant elaborated on her alleged conversation with Dr. Castles on November 30, 2000, testifying that she told Dr. Castles that she was hopeful that she suffered no serious injury to her knees and that she did not want to get workers' compensation involved. Her testimony was consistent with her admission that she told Sullivan she did not want to involve workers' compensation, and with her obvious opposition to involving workers' compensation. It is inconsistent with her contention that she filled out a claim and left it in Sullivan's office.
On August 7, 2001, claimant went to Same Day Care in Billings complaining of right knee and hip pain. (Ex. 4 at 5, emphasis added.) She told the physician who saw her that "her right knee has been hurting ever since she slipped on the ice last October. She fell again in November." (Id., emphasis added) This medical record shows that claimant by that time was seeking medical care for injuries she thought were related to her November 2000 industrial accident.
Claimant paid for the August 7, 2001 visit concerning her right knee complaints; she did not submit it to workers' compensation . Her payment was consistent with her admitted aversion to pursuing a workers' compensation claim.
Claimant continued to experience right knee pain after August 7, 2001. A month later, on September 9, 2001, she went to Dr. Robert S. Schultz, an orthopedic surgeon. She reported, "Right hip and leg pain." Dr. Schultz recorded:
This is a 51-year-old school teacher who lives in Billings and teaches in Lockwood. She has had a history of some intermittent problems with her right leg. These have become more acute in the last several months. She denies any specific injury. . . .
(Ex. 4 at 56, emphasis added.) Dr. Schultz's office note is significant for the statement that claimant denied any specific injury. The statement is consistent with her aversion to seeking workers' compensation and
Page 1 2 3 4 Montana Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|