ETHEL JALBERT (Employee)
v.
NORTHERN MAINE MEDICAL CENTER (Employer)
and
SYNERNET (Insurer)
WCB No. 06016704
No. 06016704K
Maine Workers Compensation Decisions
State Of Maine Workers' Compensation Board
February 18, 2021
Issuance Date: February 18, 2021
(DOI:
4/25/2006)
Within
25 days after issuing this decision, or 5 days after ruling
on a motion for further findings, whichever is later, the
administrative law judge may request that the full
Workers' Compensation Board review this decision. See
39-A M.R.S. § 320.
Within
20 days after receiving this decision a party may file a
motion asking the Board to find further facts and make
further conclusions of law and file the appropriate decision
if it differs from the original decision; within 15 days
after filing the motion, the party shall file its proposed
findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to 39-A
M.R.S. § 318 and 90 M.A.R. 351 Ch. 12, § 15.
Any
party in interest may request an appeal to the Appellate
Division by filing a notice of intent to appeal along with a
copy of this decision with the clerk of the Appellate
Division within 20 (twenty) days of receipt of this decision.
See 39-A M.R.S. § 321-B and M.R.App.P. 23 and
accompanying Advisory Note (available at:
https://www.courts.maine.gov/rules adminorders/rules/text/mr
app p plus 2019-04-25.pdf).
William Smith, Esq Smith Law Office, LLC.
Allan
Muir, Esq. Pierce Atwood Merrill’s Wharf.
ETHEL
JALBERT (Employee) v. NORTHERN MAINE MEDICAL CENTER
(Employer) and SYNERNET (Insurer)
DAVID
HIRTLE, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE.
Pending
before the Board is the Employee’s PETITION FOR PAYMENT
OF MEDICAL AND RELATED SERVICES regarding an established
injury of April 25, 2006. A telephonic hearing was held on
November 23, 2020, at which Ethel Jalbert testified and the
Employee submitted two proposed exhibits which were admitted
without objection as follows: EE 1 (medical records) and EE 2
(medical bills). The Employer submitted no proposed exhibits.
The case thus became ready for decision on December 30, 2020,
with the submission of the parties’ written arguments.
The
Employee seeks a finding that her established low back injury
caused radiating leg weakness which in turn caused her to
lose her balance and aggravate her work injury on December
19, 2019.[1] In the alternative, the Employee
argues that injuries she sustained on December 19, 2019,
caused her to walk with an altered gait thereafter and
aggravated her established low back injury. Premised on a
finding of causation, the Employee seeks an order that the
Employer pay for her disputed medical care that followed the
incident on December 19, 2019. The Employer argues that
because of contradictory contemporaneous medical records, the
Employee has not met her burden to demonstrate that leg
weakness, as opposed to an icy surface, caused her to lose
her balance on December 19, 2019. In the alternative, the
Employer argues that the medical opinion of Dr. John Bradford
precludes the Employee from meeting her burden of persuasion
regarding causation and therefore no payments should be
ordered.
FACTUAL
FINDINGS
1...
