Search Results
Trier of Fact (WCAB judge). An example would be an individual who was injured in a car accident and whether that accident occurred while the person was working. The issue of AOE is a medical issue. An example would be whether one or more body parts or conditions alleged by the injured worker are causally related to the workplace and attributable to a specific injury, cumulative trauma injury, or both. Requirements for establishing causation vary by state. Apportionment Apportionment in California is about parceling out all of the industrial and nonindustrial
may require expert assessment of causation for the condition(s) in question, necessity of past and/or future evaluation and treatment, apportionment, reasonableness of fees charged, prior and/or future disability, medical stability, and/or permanent impairment. Whether rendered by a judge or a jury, the trier of fact's final opinions rely on laypersons’ understanding of medical issues. Medical expert testimony is crucial to (a) extract from the morass of medical literature what the trier of fact needs to know, (b) highlight the medical facts of the case pertinent to
an aside, the question does not state the degree of preoperative coronal plane deformity. Correcting alignment in knees with severe valgus deformity is challenging. In a situation where different examiners provided different post-TKA impairment ratings, the trier of fact may lend greater credibility to the examiner adhering to the KSS methodology and using measurements from radiographs rather than from physical examination of lower limb alignment. References 1. Insall , JN , Dorr , LD , Scott , RD , et al . Rationale of the Knee Society clinical
, and consistency. That is, not upon personality. The expert should remember, however, that members of the audience are not generally scientists. In the role of witness, the expert is part mentor, part guide, and part pedagogue. Experts may readily understand the basis for scientific conclusions, but as an expert whose job it is to educate the trier of fact, communication skills are essential. The ability to interpret doctorate-level science and deliver it in a sixth-grade vernacular is critical to both the legal process’ success and the expert’s credibility. The
conflicts of interest. When treating professionals nevertheless decide to weigh in on forensic matters, a substantial challenge emerges for the trier of fact and/or administrative decision-maker, who is then likely deprived of the impartiality of the process, 14 an essential quality required to reach a fair and unbiased conclusion. Ethical and professional standards preclude the treating health professional from conducting an IME or opining on a forensic matter of a patient under the professional's care. 15 - 17 Treating physicians are, however, occasionally asked to
be for the most part irrelevant to the trier of fact or other interested parties. If the exemplar wound infection resulted in a medical malpractice suit in a jurisdiction where “you take the plaintiff as you find them,” the predisposing cause (an immunocompromised patient) is probably not pertinent. The proximate cause (the specific bacteria) is likely also moot in determination of liability. The real issue is the precipitating cause—the inadequate skin preparation for the surgical incision. Assuming the exemplar collision resulted in a personal injury lawsuit