Notice: Passwords are now case-sensitive

Remember Me
Register a new account
Forgot your password?



Community Requests

AMA Guides 5th Edition - Impairment Assessment Certification - Register NOW

Doctor's Ignorance of 'Legalese' Wasn't Adequate Basis to Exclude Opinion From Evidence

By WorkCompCentral

Thursday, August 10, 2017 | 674 | 0 | 0 min read

An Ohio appellate court ruled that a trial judge should not have stricken a medical expert’s opinion on whether a worker had suffered a “significant aggravation” of a pre-existing condition due to unfamiliarity with what that meant in “legalese.” Case: Rowland v. Buehrer, No. 27412, 08/04/2017, published. Facts and procedural history: Diane Rowland worked for the Dayton public school system. She suffered injuries in an on-the-job accident in January 2015, and the Bureau of Workers’ Compensation Awarded benefits for a concussion, a neck sprain, a lumbar spr...

Purchase this story for only $9.16!Add to Cart

For access to all of our articles, check out our subscription options.


Be the first to comment.

Related Articles