Work-Related Disease

The Supreme Court of Pennsylvania (SCOPA) issued two recent decisions, dramatically benefiting injured workers. 

Since the beginning of Workers Compensation Law in 1915, employees injured in the course of their employment have been exclusively limited to presenting a claim against their employer under the Workers Comp. Act. An employer could not be "sued" under any alternative theory of liability. Work related diseases were similarly covered by the Occupational Disease Act. There are strict time limits on presenting a claim, as well as time limitations concerning how long after the employment ends that the disease must become apparent. Unfortunately, many diseases may lie dormant and undiscovered for many years, and not produce any symptoms until long after the time limit expires. If the disease is not diagnosed until after the deadline (generally, 300 weeks after last work related exposure) the injured worker's right to seek benefits would be exhausted. 

In Tooey v. A.K Steel and Landis v. A.W. Chesterton (PA 2013) SCOPA ruled in favor of employees who developed diseases due to the use of toxic chemicals or materials at work - long after the deadline expired. The Court determined that workers who suffer disability or death beyond the WC or OD Act deadlines may bring a "common law" lawsuit against the employer  under a theory of products liability or negligence. In each of these cases, the employees were exposed to asbestos and developed mesothelioma. Before these court decisions, employees in their situation had no claim or rights against their employer (though they may have had a claim against the manufacturer of the product). The court seems to recognize that medical and scientific advances render the laws deadline of 300 weeks inadequate, since the identification of medical conditions and the cause or effect can now be determined well beyond the time frames thought sufficient when these deadlines were first created. 

Although the facts of these cases were limited to one particular substance (asbestos) the decision does not limit it's application. This potentially opens the door to many other types of claims against employers, where the evidence may establish that scientific and medical advances demonstrate the insufficiency of the 100 year old Acts. 

If you have been injured, or suffer a disease related to your employment, you NEED a law firm experienced in BOTH the Workers Compensation and Personal Injury law remedies available to you. There is a significant benefit to you - the client  - to have any and all aspects of your claim handled "under one roof", rather than having different law firms potentially acting in conflict with each other - to maximize "their fee", instead of maximizing YOUR RECOVERY. Schmidt,Kirifides & Fridkin is a "full service" injury and disability law firm, knowledgeable and skilled at handling workers compensation, personal injury and Social Security disability claims. Our goal is to maximize the compensation payable to you, through efficient coordination of all possible claims. 

With offices in Philadelphia and Media Pennsylvania, as well as in Wilmington Delaware, we have a location convenient to serve you. For a FREE consultation, call us at 610-892-9300 or online at SKFtrialattorneys.com. 

Privilege

It is well established that an individual who brings a claim for injuries "waives" (gives-up) their right to physician - patient privilege, at least to a substantial degree. As a general rule, an individual who brings a claim for injuries gives up the privilege of privacy concerning their medical information, because medical evidence must be presented to prove the severity and extent of their medical condition.  Likewise, the "opponent" (typically the employer, through their insurance company) has a right to investigate the injured worker's medical background to determine whether any past information may be relevant to the circumstances of the present condition.

However, the Courts of Pennsylvania have just set a limit on the employer's ability to infringe upon this right, in Penn State Univ. v. WCAB (Sox), No. 454 CD 2013; 455. CD 2013 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2012), determining that the claimant maintains a degree of physician - patient privilege when getting treatment from the employer's "panel physician", or company doctor. Company doctors, or Panel Physicians may either be on the employer's own premises, or an outside medical facility having a contract or even just a loose relationship with either the employer or their insurance company. Many defense attorneys "deny" that these doctors act as "agents" of the employer, while at the same time these attorneys exercise direct access to the company doctor's opinions, due to their "special" relationship.

In order to avoid the potential of abusing this relationship, as well as to encourage the necessary exchange of information between patient and doctor for effective treatment, the Court has limited the defendant's ability to communicate with these company doctors and panel physicians.  When rendering "treatment", they are acting as doctors - not merely as a witness for the defense.  Although that physician may be called to testify by the defendant, the defense attorney may not have "ex-parte" communication with the doctor. The doctor may also be subjected to cross-examination by the injured workers lawyer, to investigate any violations of this limit committed by the defense counsel.

If you have been injured at work, you need the skill and advice of a dedicated workers' compensation attorney, who knows the ever changing rules and trends in the law, in order to best protect your interest, and maximize the amount of compensation payable to you, for the injuries you have suffered.  For a FREE, no obligation consultation, contact us online at http://www.skftrialattorneys.com/, or call 610-892-9300.  With offices in Philadelphia and Media Pennsylvania, as well as in Wilmington Delaware, we have a location convenient to serve you.