No. 00989696 (1999). EMPLOYEE: Laurie Moseley.
Case Date | October 08, 1999 |
Court | Massachusetts |
Massachusetts Workers Compensation
1999.
No. 00989696 (1999).
EMPLOYEE: Laurie Moseley
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS EMPLOYEE: Laurie Moseley EMPLOYER: New England
Fellowship for Rehab Alternatives INSURER: Arbella Indemnity
Insurance Co.BOARD
NO. 00989696REVIEWING BOARD DECISION (Judges Smith, McCarthy and
Wilson)APPEARANCES
John Moran, Esq., for the employee
Robert Doonan, Esq., for the insurer
SMITH, J. The employee appeals from a
decision that awarded a closed period of further compensation benefits beyond
the period voluntarily paid by the insurer. The judge found that the employee
had recovered from the effects of her physical injury, and failed to prove that
the depression from which she suffered was causally connected to the work
injury. The employee argues that the judge applied the wrong legal standard to
her mental injury claim, and based his decision on improperly admitted
evidence. Because the judge's decision relied upon inadmissible evidence that
refuted a central contention of the employee, we recommit the case for limited
further proceedings.
We review in detail the procedural history of the case, as it
illuminates the propriety of a limited recommittal. When the insurer
discontinued its voluntary payments without prejudice, Laurie Moseley filed the
pending claim for back and knee injuries arising out of and in the course of
employment on March 11, 1996. (Employee's claim dated June 3, 1996.) The
insurer contested causal relationship and extent of incapacity. The parties
designated an orthopedic specialty for the impartial medical examiner.
(Conference Memorandum dated September 3, 1996.) After the § 10A
conference, a judge ordered ongoing total compensation, and the insurer
appealed for a § 11 de novo hearing. On November 14, 1996, pursuant to
§ 11A(2), Moseley underwent an impartial medical examination by Dr. James
S. Broome, an orthopedic surgeon. (Court Ex. 1; Ins. Ex. 6.) The conference
judge then recused and the case was reassigned. 1 The case was reached for
hearing before the newly assigned judge on July 22, 1997. The new judge planned
to retire at the end of October 1997. The judge informed the parties that the
record would close on September 5, 1997, forty-five days after the hearing. 2
(Tr. 4.)
At hearing, Moseley moved to add a psychiatric injury to her
claim, and the judge granted her motion. (Dec. 3.) The insurer agreed that an
industrial injury had occurred on March 11, 1996 but continued to contest
causation and extent of incapacity. (Dec. 3; Tr. 4-5.) The judge entered into
evidence the impartial medical examiner's report. Moseley moved to give the
impartial medical examiner's opinion no weight and to authorize the submission
of additional medical evidence. As reasons therefore, she argued that Dr.
Broome, the impartial physician, had been prejudiced by his review of a
conference memorandum containing the report of an insurance adjuster. She also
argued that the impartial medical examiner's report was inadequate and that the
case was medically complex due to her psychiatric problems. Over the insurer's
objection, the judge granted the motion, specifically requesting additional
medical evidence on the extent of Moseley's preexisting emotional disability
and how it was affected by the accepted work injury. (Dec. 4; Tr. 211-217.)
In response to the judge's request for more information on the
psychiatric claim, the insurer made an oral motion to compel Moseley to provide
a medical authorization so that it could obtain Moseley's psychiatric records,
including those from the Thorne Clinic. (Tr. 217- 218.) The judge approved the
motion to compel the medical authorization. (Tr. 218.) As the deadline for
completion of the evidence was nearing, the insurer informed the judge that it
had not received the necessary medical or psychological authorizations from
Moseley, and that it was unable to arrange for the deposition of the impartial
medical examiner before October 3, 1997. (Letter dated August 22, 1997.) On
August 27, 1997, Moseley finally gave the insurer the authorization forms.
Despite the written authorization, unbeknownst to her attorney,
Moseley verbally instructed the Thorne Clinic to withhold a part of her
records. 3 The insurer learned of this conduct on September 16, 1997. At a
status conference on October 3, 1997, the judge was informed that the
deposition of the impartial physician, Dr. Broome, had not been held because
the insurer had not received the requested psychiatric records. In response,
the judge extended the deadline for the submission of evidence until October
16, 1997. (Insurer's Brief 3.)
When the insurer finally obtained the Thorne Clinic records, it
tried to arrange for the impartial medical examiner's deposition. Dr. Broome
was then unavailable until October 17, 1997, one day after the deposition
deadline. The insurer requested additional time to submit Dr. Broome's
deposition: "If additional time cannot be provided, kindly advise, and I will
take off the deposition of Dr. Broome, since this matter will have to proceed
to another hearing before another Judge." (Letter to Judge from Robert J.
Doonan, dated October 7, 1997.) Subsequently, the insurer informed the judge
that Dr. Broome's deposition had been cancelled and that its brief and medical
records would be submitted by the deadline of October 16, "so that you may
prepare a decision prior to your departure from the Department of Industrial
Accidents on October 31, 1997." (Letter to Judge from Robert J. Doonan, dated
October 14, 1997.) The insurer did not request that the case be reassigned to
another judge so that the deposition could occur.
On the deadline for submission of evidence, October 16, 1997, the
insurer timely submitted its brief together with the records of Falmouth
Hospital, Dr. Schillizzi, Beth Israel Hospital, Falmouth Hospital
Rehabilitation Department, Dr. Leahy, Dr. Pick, and the Thorne Clinic. Moseley
objected to the admission of these records because the insurer failed to
provide 10 days written notice of its intent to offer them into evidence, as
required by G.L. c. 233, § 79G. The insurer responded that Moseley created
the situation that made impossible compliance with the "ten day rule" of c.
233, § 79G. It argued that Moseley should not be allowed to benefit from
her obstructive and dilatory tactics. It proposed admission of the records as a
cure for Moseley's failure to comply with the judge's production order, and
suggested other bases for the admission of the documents. The judge overruled
Moseley's objection and admitted the medical records as Exhibits 7-12. (Dec. 2;
handwritten ruling on motion dated 10/22/97.)
On October 24, 1997, just days before his retirement, the judge
filed the decision. He found that Laurie Moseley injured her back in a fall at
work on March 11, 1996. (Dec. 5.) The judge adopted the opinions of the
impartial medical examiner, Dr. James Broome. At the time of his examination on
November...
To continue reading
Request your trial