Close
Updated:

Massachusetts Court Discusses Credibility in Workers’ Compensation Claims

When employees suffer injuries at work, workers’ compensation laws ensure they have access to medical care and benefits. Disputes over the extent and cause of injuries can complicate claims; however, as highlighted in a recent Massachusetts case, credibility and the evidentiary weight of impartial medical examinations are important in determining eligibility for benefits. If you were hurt while working, it is prudent to consult a skilled Massachusetts workers’ compensation attorney to determine the best manner to proceed.

Facts of the Case and Procedural History

It is reported that the claimant, an employee injured while assisting with kitchen duties due to a staffing shortage, sustained a back injury and developed psychiatric issues, including depression and anxiety, allegedly related to the accident. The claimant filed for workers’ compensation benefits under the Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Act and included claims for physical and psychiatric injuries.

It is alleged that the administrative law judge (ALJ) awarded benefits for the claimant’s back injury based on findings of partial disability but denied benefits for the psychiatric injury. The denial was reportedly grounded in the claimant’s lack of credibility regarding the psychiatric claims and the ALJ’s rejection of the conclusions in the psychiatric IME’s report. The Industrial Accident Reviewing Board affirmed the ALJ’s decision, and the claimant subsequently appealed.

Credibility in Workers’ Compensation Cases

On appeal, the court examined the role of the ALJ in weighing evidence and determining credibility in workers’ compensation claims. It is reported that Massachusetts law grants prima facie evidentiary weight to an IME’s report, but this status is rebuttable. The court noted that an ALJ is not required to accept the IME’s conclusions if the underlying facts lack credibility or if the report’s conclusions are not expressed in terms of probability and are supported by admissible evidence.

It is reported that the ALJ found the claimant’s testimony regarding the psychiatric claims inconsistent and exaggerated. The ALJ highlighted discrepancies between the claimant’s alleged impairments—such as difficulty concentrating, nightmares, and an inability to perform daily tasks—and his demonstrated ability to follow questions and respond during the hearing. These inconsistencies, combined with the ALJ’s findings regarding the factual foundation of the psychiatric IME, led to the rejection of the report’s conclusions.

Ultimately, the court upheld the ALJ’s decision, emphasizing that findings of credibility and the weight given to evidence are within the ALJ’s exclusive purview. The court cited precedent affirming that IME reports do not supersede the ALJ’s judgment if the factual basis of the report is discredited. The court concluded that the ALJ’s decision was factually warranted and disclosed reasoned decision-making in compliance with Massachusetts workers’ compensation law.

Meet with a Trusted Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Lawyer

Successfully pursuing workers’ compensation benefits often requires navigating complex legal standards and evidentiary requirements. If you were hurt while working, it is advisable to meet with an attorney regarding what steps you should take to protect your interests. Attorney James K. Meehan is a trusted Massachusetts workers’ compensation attorney who can inform you of your options and help you seek any benefits available. To schedule a confidential consultation, contact Attorney Meehan at 508-822-6600 or through our online form.

Contact Us