On, April 21, 2011, an extensive battle was resolved involving a Worker's Compensation claim filed by an employee of Careworks of Ohio, Ltd. The Court of Appeals of Ohio ruled in favor of the employer, Careworks of Ohio, Ltd., after the deliberation of multiple appeals.

            The claimant, Lakisha S. Jefferson, first began working as a Case Specialist for Careworks of Ohio, Ltd. in June of 2007. On December 10, 2008, Jefferson alleged that she slipped on a wet floor while performing her daily activities in the offices of Careworks. In her statement she claimed that she slipped and stumbled, but caught herself without falling to the floor.  As a result of this stumble, Jefferson declared that she incurred injuries to her neck, knee and ankle. She then filed a claim with the Bureau of Workers' Compensation, and was granted admissions to participate in the Worker's Compensation Fund for a cervical sprain/strain and right ankle sprain/strain.

            Careworks appealed this decision to Franklin County Court of Common Pleas on the grounds that "Jefferson failed to establish that the alleged accident caused her injuries." The case was tried on June 7, 2010.  Jefferson defended her position by testifying on her own behalf and included certain exhibits as evidence. Her medical-records exhibit consisted of a fax cover sheet from her physician, two pages of the physician's notes, a patient questionnaire form, and a letter from her physician written to Jefferson's legal counsel. The trial court excluded the portion of the medical-records exhibit prepared by Jefferson's physician, labeling it as 'Hearsay'. Hearsay is information gathered by one person from another person concerning some event, condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience. When submitted as evidence, such statements are called hearsay evidence. "The use of 'hearsay evidence' in court is generally not allowed." The court ruled in favor of Careworks.

             Next, displeased with this result, Jefferson appealed the ruling and continued to defend her position in the situation. She argued that the excluded portions of her medical-records exhibit should have been admissible under the "business-records exception to the hearsay rule."   To qualify for this rule, a physician's diagnosis must meet certain conditions including:

                        (1) - the record must have been a systematic entry kept in the records of                                                         the hospital or physician and made in regular course of business

                        (2) - diagnosis must have been the result of well-known and accepted                                                             objective testing

                        (3) - diagnosis must have rested solely upon the subjective complaints of                                                         the patient

                        (4) - diagnosis must have been made by a qualified person

                        (5) - evidence sought to be introduced must be competent and relevant

                        (6) - if the use of the record is for the purpose of proving the truth of                                                         matter asserted at trial, it must be the product of the party  

                                            seeking it's admission

                        (7) - it must be properly authenticated.

            The Court of Appeals analyzed many factors while determining their final verdict. The court found that there was no authentication of the medical-records exhibit as the only witness who testified at the trial was Jefferson. Upon review, the court also stated that the letter from the physician to appellant's (Jefferson's) counsel didn't qualify under the business-records exception as it didn't appear to be the type of document that would be prepared as part of the physician's regular practice in assessing and treating patients. The physician's office sent the letter to Jefferson's counsel while the claim was pending and this suggested that the letter was not prepared in the regular course of business. The court cited the Johnson v. Cassens Transport Co., case, which established "when a physician's letters to a claimant's attorney was prepared while litigation was pending, it would not be unreasonable for the court to conclude that the circumstances of their preparation indicated a lack of trustworthiness." The court also declared that Jefferson presented no evidence of any external signs of injury, which would be required to prove slipping ad stumbling caused her pain.

            The Court of Appeals of Ohio affirmed the previous judgment in favor of Careworks, expressing that "expert medical testimony was necessary to establish causation for internal and elusive injuries."

Upcoming Fanger & Associates LLC Events

Workshop - "Advocating for Children with 'Less Serious' Disabilities"   

Deborah Zaccaro Hoffman

          At the workshop, Ms. Hoffman will be discussing the challenges of obtaining services for kids who don't fit neatly into a disability category, or are perceived as not having a "serious disability".  For example, a child that qualifies for county services based on a diagnosis may not qualify initially for a 504 plan or an IEP; or, a child with social challenges that limit employability may not qualify for an IEP because of the belief that "social" isn't education. These children can easily fall through the cracks.   

          Ms. Hoffman addresses how obtaining needed services is essential to achieving positive outcomes.  Making a strong case for services requires an understanding of eligibility standards and developing strategies for educating and working with decision makers.  The workshop is designed to assist attendees in: identifying common obstacles to services, becoming familiar with differing eligibility standards across programs, and learning several strategies to increase effectiveness.    

          If you would like to attend the workshop, please contact Linda Kresnye at (216) 229-5757, ext. 126.  The event is only $10 for families/professionals, and $20 for professionals receiving 2.0 continued education credits. You may also learn more about the Red Treehouse Organization by visiting  Red Treehouse.

           Ms. Zaccaro Hoffman is an extremely dedicated advocate for disability rights and works hard to influence policy for children and adults with disabilities.  If you have legal question or concerns regarding special needs advocacy, special educational issues for children or adults or matters regarding probate and estate planning for parties with special needs, we  encourage you to contact Ms. Hoffman to discuss the options available to assist you.