Singh v. Time Warner Cable
August 12, 2016
Multiple IME IME§312 Headache Vision Facts not in evidence
Summary from the Troubh Heisler Attorneys
The judge can find no clear and convincing evidence to the contrary of the medical opinions of two §312 IME doctors who found no work injury.
Singh was a service technician who prepared and installed cable systems. He developed headaches and vision problems and was eventually terminated. He filed petitions alleging an electrical shock during work caused his symptoms.
Dr. Bamberger and Dr. Barkin performed §312 IMEs, and both concluded that he did not have a work injury but instead had a psychiatric problems. Dr. Mainen and Dr. Voss also perform §207 exams and concurred with the §312 doctors. Singh’s neuropsychologist Dr. Podraza supported his claim, but the judge discounted it because he assumed facts not in evidence.
The appellate panel affirmed the decision holding that they could reverse a decision based on an IME only if the findings were not supported by any competent evidence or the record discloses no reasonable basis to support the decision. The panel found that the judge fully examined and discussed the medical records and had competent evidence to support her decision.