Daniel Cody Proves Office Worker Not As Hurt As She Alleged

In the case of Belousek v. Orthopedic Associates, an office worker at a doctor's office claimed she fell off a step stool injuring multiple body parts. Based on the evidence, the accident itself was not disputed and the defense focused on nature and extent of the injury. The petitioner alleged due to the pain she was unable to work and needed continued follow up care. She was treated by Suburban Orthopedics who recommended back surgery, carpel tunnel release and a psychological review and treatment for depression. The petitioner alleged she was depressed because of her injuries and inability to perform activities of daily living without pain. Her psychologist felt an underlying psychological problem was aggravated based on the work injuries and the petitioner's perceived inability to get correct care.

The Petitioner claimed temporary total disability benefits of $346.67/week for 17 7/8 weeks for $6,190 and reasonable and necessary medical services of $10,293.95 plus future medical for two surgeries. On behalf of the Respondent we submitted two reports from our orthopedist who found the petitioner suffered only a strain at best and was not in need of further medical care. We also presented the report of a psychologist who performed a psychological exam. The report found that the petitioner was depressed but also that she had a need to be the victim and blame others for her problems. He found that the petitioner may have had the depression aggravated but only if she truly was hurt and not exaggerating her symptoms which the doctor felt she was.

After having the petitioner admit on cross to having severe pain in many parts of her body that she claimed prevented her from performing activities of daily living, we presented the evidence of our investigator that had found the petitioner moving about freely without any pain behaviors. The surveillance shoed the petitioner filling her washer fluid in her car, opening the hood, bending over, cleaning the windows, all of which she said caused her great pain during her testimony.

The arbitrator found the petitioner had reached MMI shortly after the accident and that the petitioner was not entitled to any of the disputed disability or medical bills and denied the request for future medical care. The case was later settled for a small amount of permanency for the admitted back strain.