Jonathan Dubois v. Sappi Fine Paper
March 1, 2023
Summary from the Troubh Heisler Attorneys
Jonathan Dubois v. Sappi Fine Paper- Where in his written report the 312 IME stated the whole person permanent impairment resulting from the 2010 work related low back injury was 5% but at deposition stated that the 5% was the result of a pre-existing degenerative condition and later testified the work injury could play “some small role”, it was not error for the ALJ to reject the 312 IME medical findings and conclude that another provider’s 5% permanent impairment rating was clear and convincing contrary medical evidence under Sec. 312(7). The ALJ was not compelled to adopt the 312 IME findings where they are ambiguous, and whether ambiguous or not, the change in testimony plus the unequivocal 5% permanent impairment rating from another provider could have reasonably persuaded the ALJ that it was highly probable the record did not support the 312 IME conclusion that the work injury no longer was responsible for the permanent impairment.