Credible evidence is essential in the proof of a workers’ compensation case. To prove a case at trial the parties must offer credible evidence to the trier of the facts, especially where there appears to be a laundry list of intervening and superseding events since the time of the accident at work.
An appellate court, in a per curiam opinion, affirmed the dismissal of a workers’ compensation where the employee did not offer credible evidence, through expert and lay testimony, that the increase in psychiatric disability flowing from an original accident of 19 years earlier could be causally related to the present level of psychiatric disability that the petition was evaluated at.
At the time of the trip, it was demonstrated that the petitioner suffered from superseding and intervening conditions that could not be credibility associated with the much earlier accident at work.
The intervening issues included: divorcee, lack of mobility, weight gain, hypertension, diabetes, unemployment, finances, inability to socialize and depression.The mere testimony from a medical expert, who did not treat the superseding interviewing conditions, and the lay testimony offered, were not enough to convince the compensation judge at trial and the appellate court on review, that the increase was linked to the earlier accident to workers' right foot of 19 years earlier.
The trial court opined:
“Considering all of the evidence presented, I find that the testimony of both doctors concerning this potentially harmful side effect undercuts a finding of medical necessity. Also undercutting such a finding is the fact that petitioner never sought psychiatric treatment from 1998 through early 2016, despite his physical condition remaining largely unchanged during that time.”
The longstanding rule as to the causal relationship of superseding intervening events is that, “When there is a subsequent event that occurs as a direct result of an original compensable injury, then that subsequent event is considered to be a natural consequence of the initial injury and is compensable also.” Gelman, Jon L, Workers Compensation Law, 38 NJPRAC 10.17 (Thomson-Reuters 2017). Selak v. Murray Rubber Co., 8 N.J.Misc. 838, 152 A. 78 (1930), aff'd 108 N.J.L. 548, 159 A. 93 (Err. & App.1932). Although that is the rule, there still exists the necessity of substantiating the claim with credible evidence at the time of trial.
DOCKET NO. A-5616-15T4
Decided: January 16, 2018
Unpublished Opinion*
2018 WL 446006
Only the Westlaw citation is currently available.
*This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R.1:36-3.
1:36-3. Unpublished Opinions No unpublished opinion shall constitute precedent or be binding upon any court. Except for appellate opinions not approved for publication that have been reported in an authorized administrative law reporter, and except to the extent required by res judicata, collateral estoppel, the single controversy doctrine or any other similar principle of law, no unpublished opinion shall be cited by any court. No unpublished opinion shall be cited to any court by counsel unless the court and all other parties are served with a copy of the opinion and of all contrary unpublished opinions known to counsel.
Note: Adopted July 16, 1981 to be effective September 14, 1981; caption and rule amended July 13, 1994 to be effective September 1, 1994; amended July 12, 2002 to be effective September 3, 2002; amended July 23, 2010 to be effective September 1, 2010.
…
Jon L. Gelman of Wayne NJ is the author of NJ Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thomson-Reuters) and co-author of the national treatise, Modern Workers’ Compensation Law (West-Thomson-Reuters).
