+- Workers' Compensation Discussion Forums (http://www.workerscompensation.com/forums/general)
+-- Forum: Category (/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Injured Worker Forum (/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Thread: opinion on my case (/showthread.php?tid=8212)
opinion on my case - pensfan - 08-26-2009 11:52 PM
I am new to this as a participant but I have read many posts over the past year. I am in minnesota, original injury in dec 2000. herinated l4-5 disc while putting stock away. Had treatment, medication, therapy leading to MRI which confirmed herniation. I follow through to the "T" attending all sessons and reporting to work daily. Life goes on. In 2005 awaken unable to move legs literally. Go to hospital, emergency laminotomy. feel better for about 3 months then pain in leg and back resurface. continue to see doctor but on my own expense tis time because I didnt know the two were related. 2006 see pain management dr who prescribes epidurals. no positive response. tries various meds leading to spinal cord stim implant in 2007. two drs working with me review my history and decide that this current issue is definetly associated with original injury. proceed with SCSTIM. 1.5 years of misery. change drs. new dr states that only treatment is fusion. get another opinion and new dr concurs. proceed with all tests MRI CT scan CT with contrast, EMG, Mylogram. all point to fusion. HAve stim removed in july5 have L4-5 fusion july 28. all my own expense. I have retained an attorny wo states very comlicated case but assures me of ultimate "win" meantime I continued to work up to fusion. off for 4 week now looking to return in 8. dr states maybe not for 4 months due to physical job. Now broke with astronomical bills rolling in. Waiting for ins dr IME results. any thoughts would be very helpful
RE: opinion on my case - 1171 - 08-27-2009 09:56 AM
could be statute of limitation issues as well as causality.
there will be adverse medical opinions developed and, given the high risk of an adverse court decision, it probably will be settled for a nominal amount.
RE: opinion on my case - pensfan - 08-27-2009 10:35 AM
1171 Wrote:could be statute of limitation issues as well as causality.
there will be adverse medical opinions developed and, given the high risk of an adverse court decision, it probably will be settled for a nominal amount.
that isnt positive news
RE: opinion on my case - 1171 - 08-27-2009 11:40 AM
from an anonymous message board without a working knowledge of the judge or opposing atty etc. it's a total wild guess.
but the description provided seems to document weaknesses and not strengths: long delays; difficult and conflicting medical findings; failure to file timely.
RE: opinion on my case - Oh Boy - 09-12-2009 09:46 PM
Are you at the same job you were at originally? That could be a big factor in this. If not, the ins co will say that you worked all these years and it's a new injury and not related to them. You could in turn, try to file it on your current employer and may or may not win
But remember one thing. When you file a worker's comp claim you are suing your employer. They can't fire you for filing a claim but don't expect them to be happy with you for filing.
RE: opinion on my case - Bad Boy Bad Boy - 09-12-2009 11:20 PM
Oh Boy, Injured Workers aren't sueing anyone, unless the employer did not not have any work comp insurance.
W/C is a no fault system, meaning the injured person, or the employer are not at fault, removing the idea of a suit against such party.
A settlement though is provide when a disability is present from the injury.
RE: opinion on my case - Bad Boy Bad Boy - 09-12-2009 11:22 PM
Pensfan, I can only offer an opinion to what your attorney may be saying. An attorney very seldom will take a case only when there is something in it for them. Otherwise they may not of took the case.
RE: opinion on my case - Oh Boy - 09-13-2009 10:59 AM
Bad Boy Bad Boy Wrote:Oh Boy, Injured Workers aren't sueing anyone, unless the employer did not not have any work comp insurance.
W/C is a no fault system, meaning the injured person, or the employer are not at fault, removing the idea of a suit against such party.
A settlement though is provide when a disability is present from the injury.
Yes, on paper it is a no fault system. Who do you think pays the premiums? When they have claims what do you think happens to their premiums? Many large companies are self insured for the first $100k. So it is coming out of their pocket. Do you really think they are thinking "no fault" when their rates go up or they have to cut $100k check? It's not free health care.
RE: opinion on my case - Bad Boy Bad Boy - 09-13-2009 12:58 PM
Oh Boy, I was making comment to the issue of Sueing nothing else, all the other issues you pointed out, I fully am aware of.
May I ask, what is your point then?