A workers’ compensation judge may reject the uncontradicted testimony of an independent medical witness who has examined a claimant, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled in an opinion that also called for legislative attention to a “systemic concern” with the assignment of physician exams.
In a unanimous May 25 ruling in IA Construction v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Rhodes), the justices found that the Commonwealth Court erred in determining that a WCJ needed to identify substantial contrary evidence in the record to support the rejection of Dr. M. Bud Lateef’s testimony regarding claimant Jeffrey Rhodes’ disability status.
This content has been archived.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]
