RICO claims adequately plead against IME doctors and IME vendors

Let us know if you have any information on Bad IMEs or Insurance companies otherwise behaving badly

badinsco@gmail.com

Lynn Carter of MCMC is not a real person

Remember when I posted about those trials where it came out that Lynn Carter of MCMC does not exist and said that the transcript will probably bear this out.  Well, we have the transcript.  It does.

Mischievous and deceitful. Chicanerous and deplorable

The New Normal

Over at New York Personal Injury Law Blog as part of his series of posts about insurance company medical exams, Eric Turkewitz has a great posts on how insurance companies and not insurance company doctors decide what a normal range of motion is.

He provides part of a transcript evidencing this sad fact, which we now quote to a lesser extent (the emphasis is his):

Q:  So there should be no difference in the normal range of motion for an individual who’s 26 and  another one  who’s 34?

 A:  Actually, that’s not true.  This examination was done for a company that uses a different standard for range  of  motion  testing.

Q: Don’t you use your own opinions as to what normal range of motion  is?

 A:  I do, but if I’m employed by them to do an examination, I have  to  use  their  standards.

Q:  So you then will take a standard that you know isn’t accurate, and use it in a medical-legal context?

 A:  No.

Q:  Is that your testimony?

A:     No.     That’s not my testimony.   At   the end of my report, all of these   reports, I  state clearly that the range of motion testing is based on the American Academy of Orthopedic  Surgeon’s   standards,   but  there  are differences  with  body  habitus,  with  age, with activities. I state that clearly, so it’s a very subjective exam, and the 60 degrees here conforms to what this carrier says is normal. That’s not what I think is normal.

Q:    And you used it anyway?

A:   I   did.

Who actually creates these reports?

Not these guys

In this instance, the examinations performed by Drs. Miller and Ferrante are not persuasive. The range of motion findings from the two examining doctors differ. Dr. Miller found cervical flexion was 45 degrees; while Dr. Ferrante found it to be 55 degrees. Both doctors noted these findings were normal although Dr. Ferrante acknowledged limited range of motion and mild tenderness over C5-C6 and T1-T2. Dr. Miller found a normal neurological exam, but straight leg raising was negative to 60 degrees.

Further, a review of the similarity of the reports of Drs. Miller and Ferrante detracts from their weight and persuasiveness. 

A portion of Dr. Miller’s report reads as follows: 

Medication:  

The claimant takes Procardia and HCTZ at the present time;
however, the claimant did not elaborate as to the dosage
 or frequency of the medication. 

Employment History:  

The claimant was unemployed at the time of the accident.
She is currently not working. 

The same portion of Dr. Ferrante’s report reads as follows: 

Medication: 

The claimant takes Procardia and HCTZ at the present time;
however, the claimant did not elaborate as to the dosage
or frequency of the medication.  

Employment History:  

The claimant was unemployed at the time of the accident.
She is currently not working.

In sum, the question is how can reports from two examining experts in different specialties can have the exact same wording. The exact same language may indicate that the examinations followed a particular format and the resulting reports were not dictated by the individual doctors. At the very least, the form of these reports detracts from the weight and credibility of the findings.

MCMC

UPDATE 10/22/13 [We have the transcript]

From a reliable source:

Yesterday, a witness from MCMC testified that Lynn Carter does not exist.   In that case, and in many others, MCMC's IME scheduling letters say to contact Lynn Carter to reschedule.  Hopefully we will receive the transcript soon, which should bear this out [Kings County Civil Court, Index No. 109169/10.

UPDATE:  It happened again in 81798/10 and 81799/10 [Kings County Civil Court].

Below is an example of a letter saying to contact Lynn Carter.

IME instructions

"IF THE PROGNOSIS APPEARS GOOD, THEN STATE THAT.  OTHERWISE BE SILENT."