The concept of competing medical experts is commonplace in the realm of personal-injury litigation. No matter on which side of the fence the client resides, it can take a high-caliber “hired gun” to get the job done. In the world of workers’ compensation, a hackneyed dichotomy still worms its way into this battle of the experts in a manner not prevalent in other, less exuberant areas of law. This distinction has come to be known as the treating physician versus the independent medical examiner.
While the seasoned workers’ compensation attorney understands that this supposed distinction is, in most instances, without a difference, it appears that a mindset may still linger among some practitioners who find sport in attacking the fundamental notion of independent medical exams, labeling the examiners biased in every way imaginable.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
