Case History Page
MEDICAL DIAGNOSTIC EVIDENCE - REJECTED BY LIBERTY MUTUAL
LIBERTY MUTUAL REJECTED THE OPINIONS OF TWO OF THEIR OWN CONSULTING PHYSICIANS BECAUSE THEY SUPPORT MY CLAIM FOR DISABILITY.
LIBERTY MUTUAL USED A NURSE TO OVERRULE THEIR OWN TWO CONSULTING PHYSICIANS, AND MY TREATING PHYSICIAN.
LIBERTY'S PHYSICIANS OPINION: QUOTE
"ADVISED SHE IS TOTALLY DISABLED FROM WORKING. APPROVE THE CLAIM, FOLLOW-UP ON SOCIAL SECURITY" "NOT A GOOD CANDIDATE FOR ASSISTING WITH RETURN TO WORK"
- ALL OF THESE DIAGNOSTIC MEDICAL REPORTS ARE SEVERE -
1 MRI of my cervical spine - performed by Resurgens
2 Electromyography test (EMGs), and 1 neurological examination -
performed by Atlanta Neuromuscular Diagnostics
1 Functional capacity exam (FCE) - performed by Dr. Stewart (Liberty Request)
1 Functional capacity exam (FCE) - performed by Dr. Gower (Neurosurgeon)
MEDICAL FINDINGS:
MYELOMALCIA AND MYELORADICULOPATHY
(SPINAL CORD DISEASE AND SPINAL NERVE ROOT DISEASE)
Severe chronic degenerative cervical spine, and symptoms stemming from compression on the spinal cord;
Bilateral chronic mid cervical radiculopathies. Severe chronic muscle spasms in both shoulders and hands. Focal disc compression with mass effect upon the right central C5 root with evidence of flattening of the anterior spinal cord. Both upper extremities are remarkable for evidence of chronic denervation/reinervation. C4-5 right posterolateral focal disc herniation. Prominent right posterolateral osteophyte causing corresponding neural foraminal stenosis. C5-6 Bilateral posterolateral osteophytes with corresponding neural foraminal stenosis. C5-6 moderate associated broad based circumferential disc bulge. Mid and lower spondylosis. Increased pinprick sensation of the (C5-6) dermatome, and muscle atrophy.
LIBERTY MUTUAL VIGOROUSLY DEFENDS ITS ILLEGAL TACTICS IN COURT, STILL REFUSING TO REPENT! Liberty Mutual forced a severly disabled woman to fight them in court for her disability insurance (Read the judges comments below)
Jacqueline Everson v. Liberty Mutual, Civil Action No. 1:05-CV-2459-RWS
[36] JUDGE RICHARD W. STORY’S ORDER STATES: JUDGE’S QUOTES;
P11.
(B) “Plaintiff was examined by Dr. Ralph D’Auria, an orthopedic surgeon hired by Liberty. According to Plaintiff’s undisputed statements, Dr. D’Auria spent approximately fifteen minutes examining Plaintiff.”
P36 - P37.
(D) “Plaintiff’s treating doctor, Dr. Stewart – who observed Plaintiff most frequently and over the longest period of time-steadily maintained that Plaintiff’s condition rendered her “100% disabled.”
(E) “In addition, Dr. Washington’s interpretation of the EMG she performed in November 2004, which was offered shortly before Liberty terminated Plaintiff’s benefits, bolsters Plaintiff’s claim of disability.”
P38
(F) “Dr. D’Auria’s opinion, which virtually stands alone in its minimization of the severity of Plaintiff’s condition among the seven doctors with whom Plaintiff visited, is subject to questioning in at least several respects.“
(G) “Indeed, several inconsistencies in Dr. D’Auria’s report convince this Court that it cannot be said to be more objectively reliable as a matter of law than the other medical evidence in the record.”
P40.
(H) “Third, Dr. D’Auria’s conclusion that Plaintiff’s cervical radiculopathy was “mild” and “has been improving over time with the procedures performed and the medical care that she has received” is in conflict with virtually all other medical evidence in the record.
(I) “During the same time period, Dr. Stewart stated that Plaintiff’s condition was worsening, and Dr. Washington’s observations underscored the severity of Plaintiff’s condition.”
(J) Dr. D’Auria’s conclusion that Plaintiff was improving and would “regain her normal strength and normal function” within three to four months is simply belied by virtually all other evidence in the record.”
P41.
(K) “Moreover, Dr. D’Auria conceded that Plaintiff was at least partially disabled at the time of termination, and acknowledges that the dispute is only over the “extent of disability.”
(L) “In light of Liberty’s inherent conflict-of-interest, the Court cannot conclude that its reliance on Dr. D’Auria’s opinion over that of Drs. Stewart and Washington was objectively reasonable as a matter of law.”
LIBERTY MUTUAL HAS CAUSED A STORM IN MY LIFE, BY DENYING A DISABLED WOMAN HER LEGITIMATE DISABILITY CLAIM, AND FORCING HER TO FIGHT IN COURT FOR TWO YEARS. LIBERTY MUTUAL IS NOT RELIABLE, AND DOES NOT BELIEVE IN THE TRUTH. LIBERTY MUTUAL, A NAME YOU CANNOT TRUST!
PLEASE JOIN ME IN DENOUNCING THIS GREAT INJUSTICE DONE, BY LIBERTY MUTUAL!
