A zealous and sedulous defense waged by Goldberg Segalla partner Daniel T. Sanchez resulted in a significantly favorable nuisance value settlement for a health-care client in a recent Kansas City workers’ compensation case.

The claimant, who worked as a phlebotomist, alleged ‘bilateral carpal tunnel’ and ‘cubital tunnel syndrome’ caused by repetitive occupational trauma.

But while her Claim for Compensation asserted a date of injury in December 2021, the claimant’s deposition testimony early in the case suggested her symptoms did not start until March 2022, raising questions regarding when the injury first happened.

Also signaling a red flag in the matter was while the claimant’s injury initially involved her right hand and elbow, it was later alleged there was trauma to her left hand and elbow following an Independent Medical Exam ordered by her attorney.

Suspecting the claimant’s injuries based on those inconsistencies did not stem from the work she performed for our client, Dan — a St. Louis-based partner in our firm’s Workers’ Compensation practice group — immediately began collecting additional medical records to refute the new allegations of left hand and elbow injuries. In doing so, he found reference to a prior diagnosis of bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome and evidence of similar complaints preceding the claimant’s employment with our client, which began on June 1, 2021.

Through his meticulous examination of the claimant’s medical records, Dan found that she was seen by a physician for carpal tunnel syndrome on June 9, 2021 — a mere eight days after her employment started with our client. The necessary inference drawn from that record was that the diagnoses pre-dated her employment with our client. Given that the claimant was self-employed as a freelance phlebotomist for years before her employment with our client, and in light of comments made in later records that surgery had been discussed previously but was cancelled after she changed jobs, Dan suspected that she took the job with our client so that she could receive Workers’ Comp benefits and have her treatment covered.

With that information in hand, Dan requested the claimant be deposed a second time, to confront her over the newly found medical evidence and inconsistencies. The request for a second deposition was opposed by the claimant’s attorney, leading to a conference call with the administrative law judge presiding over the case. The judge then ruled a second deposition was not necessary, saying the medical evidence and claimant’s history clearly did not support her claims, adding that she was caught “dead to rights.” Thus, a nuisance value settlement was reached in an amount that was very favorable to our client.

Instrumental in the success of the case was St. Louis-based partner James R. Hess, whose early work on the matter established an important timeline, setting the stage for Dan’s success in drawing out inconsistencies in the claimant’s allegations.

The positive outcome in this matter is testimony to Dan’s unyielding attention to detail, as well as his diligence and relentlessness in the pursuit of evidence, ensuring the best-possible defense was delivered for our client.