 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Sheperd v. National Mines Corporation2/14/2003
ults confirm the diagnosis of Major Depression.
....
The reason I can use to support my opinion that his condition has worsened is the mix of medications that he is now taking when compared with that administered by Dr. Rank in 1995. In 1995, he was prescribed Prozac, 20 mgm, one per day; in the year 2000 he is prescribed Celexa, 20 mgm, three per day. In 1995, he was prescribed Trazodone, 100 mgm, two at bedtime. At this time he takes Imipramine 25 mgm, two at bedtime. In 1995, he was prescribed Wellbutrin, 100 mgm, taking one three times a day. In 2000, he takes Risperdal, 1 mgm, twice per day and Valium, 5 mgm, twice per day. In other words, he is taking a higher dose of the seratonin reuptake inhibitor (Celexa) and has had the addition of an atypical anti-psychotic included in his daily regimen, along with the addition of Valium. It is for this reason that I conclude that his impairment rating has increased from 15% to 20%. Although this regimen may be helping him maintain his level of coping, it is also very sedating and would put him at risk if he returned to the mines as a section foreman. Dr. Stumbo continues to prescribe the nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agent (Flurbiprofen) and a medication to help him with his breathing (Azmacort).
In his opinion, the ALJ stated,"It was on the basis of [Shepherd] taking a higher dose of the Seratonin re-uptake inhibitor (Celexa) and the addition of an atypical anti-psychotic included in his daily medication along with the addition of Valium that was the reason [Dr. Weitzel] concluded that his impairment rating had increased from 15% to 20%." We are persuaded that the ALJ's summary fairly characterized Dr.
Weitzel's basic conclusions regarding the impact of Shepherd's medications.
Shepherd also contends that, in rebutting Dr. Weitzel's testimony, Dr. Ludwig engaged in speculation. Specifically, Shepherd alleges that Dr. Ludwig engaged in speculation when he stated that the removal of Shepherd from his Risperdal prescription, which occurred prior to his examination of Shepherd,"more likely reflected the prescribing practices of a new psychiatrist rather than an indication of clinical status. "However, we agree with the Board:
The ALJ, in our opinion, thoroughly analyzed the evidence and offered not only a sound basis for her reliance upon Dr. Ludwig but also one that is eminently reasonable under the circumstances. As we view the evidence, it is clearly a reasonable inference that the primary reason for Dr. Weitzel assessing a greater degree of impairment and concluding a significant worsening of condition was attributable to the medication and, more specifically, Risperidol, as being a deciding factor in his determination. Simply because Dr. Ludwig saw Shepherd later by itself did not necessitate the ALJ's reliance upon him. However, Clearly his analysis of the medications and considering the statement that Risperidol was no longer being prescribed had a major impact upon his opinion and it was reasonable for the ALJ to infer that it would have likewise impacted Dr. Weitzel's opinion. Reasonable inferences, so long as that are born out by the record, and this one was, are for the ALJ. Jackson vs. General Refractories, Ky., 581 S.W.2d 10 (1979).
For the foregoing reasons the opinion of the Workers' Compensation Board is affirmed.
ALL CONCUR.
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.
|
|