Congratulations to Steve Coonrod and Tracey Hyde for successfully defending a fraudulent claim!

Congratulations to Steve Coonrod and Tracey Hyde for successfully defending a fraudulent claim!

Congratulations to Steve Coonrod and Tracey Hyde for successfully defending a fraudulent claim!

The claimant was a commercial driver and claimed multiple injuries to his back, neck, and other body parts after being struck by a cement truck which he alleged lunged forward at a high rate of speed, travelled 10 feet, and crushed him against a large wash rack.

Investigation revealed there was an incident where a truck rocked forward and then backward at the time of the alleged incident. The claimant contended he reported the incident by cell phone to his supervisor immediately after it happened, went home and then went to the emergency room for complaints or arm, neck, and back pain. Next, he sought chiropractic care at the referral of his attorney. He later gave a statement to the adjuster denying prior back pain and describing a dramatic accident.

During his deposition, the claimant testified the truck travelled 10 feet before striking him and causing extensive damage to the truck and a large metal wash rack. While admitting to a personal injury lawsuit many years earlier he repeatedly denied injuring his back in that prior accident.

Discovery revealed the claimant had not only injured his back previously but actually gave deposition testimony remotely, from his current job, describing his prior back injury in his ongoing PI case against another defendant. This occurred around one year prior to the alleged back injury. Multiple other misstatements were revealed including misrepresentations made to coworkers which were refuted by testimony at the final hearing. Video and GPS data from the truck involved in the incident also refuted the claimant’s allegations. Coworkers and the driver refuted allegations of damage to the truck and wash rack. The extent of the misrepresentations are detailed in a scathing order entered by the Judge of Compensation Claims.

The claimant’s allegations that the employer had not saved a pre-trip inspection report for a vehicle damaged by the claimant in an unrelated accident or video of the alleged from a remote location were deemed by the Judge as being of no significance to the ultimate issues. Claimant’s arguments were also rejected by the DCA, and the Judge’s order was per curiam affirmed.

#LegalSuccess #WorkersCompensation #LitigationStrategy #EmployerDefense