We recently reported on our firm’s success in disallowing a potentially expensive hip claim. We are pleased to report yet another success in disallowing a questionable claim for an injury to the hip. Attorney Wendy Hauck of our firm litigated this matter, taking lay and medical testimony and submitting a memorandum to the judge for a decision.
The claimant alleged that she injured her left hip from repetitive activities at work. She underwent left hip surgery in 2021 but testified that she first discussed the left hip being related to work with her doctors at the end of 2021 or 2022. A representative of the employer testified that she first became aware of the compensation claim for the left hip in June 2024 when the employer’s insurance carrier informed her that a claim had been filed. The employer witness further testified that no report of a work-related left hip injury was ever made with the employer. In fact, the claimant had received short-term disability benefits after her hip surgery in 2021. In filing for these benefits, the claimant indicated the injury was not work related. A second employer witness corroborated the testimony of the first witness.
The claimant’s treating physician testified at a deposition that he first treated the claimant for a left hip in February 2020 and performed surgery in February 2021. He testified he did not recall having any discussion with the claimant about her work duties or what caused and contributed to her left hip problem. He did not recall what the claimant’s job duties are and did not recall discussing her work duties with her. He further testified that he would still need to have a discussion with the claimant regarding her specific duties in order to determine whether her job contributed to or caused her left hip condition.
Based on this testimony, the judge disallowed the claim for the left hip, holding that when, as here, the medical evidence is vague and lacks clarity, there is insufficient evidence of the necessary recognizable link between the alleged occupational disease and some distinctive feature of the claimant’s work. Wendy’s work on this claim from beginning to end illustrates our firm’s persistence and preparation, putting our clients in the best possible position to win.
