CP# 2006-15314 (2009). IVAN PUCHA Petitioner v. TWIN OAKS BLOC Respondent.
Court | New Jersey |
New Jersey Worker's Compensation
2009.
CP# 2006-15314 (2009).
IVAN PUCHA Petitioner v. TWIN OAKS BLOC Respondent
NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATIONCP # 2006-15314IVAN PUCHA Petitioner, v.
TWIN OAKS BLOC RespondentDECISION DATE: JULY 1,
2009PLACE: NEW BRUNSWICK, NEW JERSEY BEFORE: THE HONORABLE VIRGINIA M. DIETRICH ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISING
JUDGE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEARANCES:LAW
OFFICE OF JAY WEGODSKY, ESQUIRE BY: JAY WEGODSKY, ESQUIRE
ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONERSTEVENS
and SCHWAB BY: MICAHEL MIZIN, ESQUIRE ATTORNEY FOR
RESPONDENT REPRESENTING AIGLAW OFFICE OF
WILLIAM BARRETT BY: ANN DEBELLIS, ESQUIRE REPRESENTING
NEW JERSEY MANUFACTURERSJOHN F. TRAINOR, INC.
BY: INGRID BENNETT, C.S.R LICENSE NO:
30X1100212500THE COURT: This is the matter of Ivan Pucha vs. Twin Oaks Bloc,
Claim Petition 2006-15314.
May I have appearances, please?
MR. WEGODSKY: Good morning, your Honor, Jay wegodsky appearing
on behalf of the Petitioner, Pucha.
MR. MIZIN: Good morning, your Honor, Michael Mizin on behalf of
Twin Oaks Bloc, as insured by AIG.
MS. DEBELLIS: Ann DeBellis on behalf of the Respondent, as
insured by New Jersey Manufacturers.
THE COURT: Is there anything before I render my decision?
MR. MIZIN: No, your Honor.
MS. DEBELLIS: No, your Honor.
THE COURT: This is my decision in the matter of Ivan Pucha vs.
Twin oaks Bloc in Claim Petition 2006-15314.
The Petitioner filed a petition against the Respondent on May
30th, 2006. He claimed exposure to repetitive lifting, bending, carrying and
the movement of heavy objects from the start of his employment in January of
1998 through the filing of the complaint.
The original claim petition was filed against the Respondent as
insured by New Jersey Manufacturers. New Jersey Manufacturers was on the risk
from March 23, 2004 through March 22, 2007.
Thereafter, the Petitioner amended the claim petition to include
a claim against AIG for an occupational exposure from January of 1998 through
the end of AIG's coverage.
The Petitioner also added a reference in the amendment to an
accident of January 9th, 2004, in the amended claim petition. The claim
petition gives no information as to the circumstances surrounding the accident.
The original petition and the amended petition claim the same extent and
character of injury; that is, loss of usefulness of bilateral shoulders and
arms, neck and back.
AIG insured Twin Oaks Bloc from March 23, 2003 to March 23, 2004.
NJM and AIG both filed answers to the claim petition and amended petition
denying the claims. Thereafter, the matter came before me for settlement
conference.
A settlement was not reached and a pretrial memorandum was
executed. The pretrial memorandum referenced the accident date of January 9th,
2004, and the occupational claim.
At issue was notice, exposure, knowledge, causal relationship,
injuries and permanent disability.
The Petitioner included the bill of Dr. Mitchell Auerbach on the
pretrial form. Dr. Auerbach, a chiropractor, had submitted a bill for treatment
rendered to the Petitioner in the amount of $10,636. At the time of the entry
of the pretrial memorandum, it was contemplated that Drs. Horowitz and Gross
would have to testify. Subsequently, the parties agreed to submit this matter
for my determination on the reports of the doctors.
The Petitioner testified that he began work at Respondent, Twin...
To continue reading
Request your trial