Dr. Z’s Double Dribble: Fund TTD Suspended as Coaching Duties Create Deposition Snafu

Happy New Year! Today’s post is actually a mini post.  Or a “snippet” of the law.  Which answers the age-old question of what happens when the claimant’s medical expert aka “treating doc” allows his personal recreational endeavors to interfere with litigation-related commitments. 

Is there impunity where the doctor’s scheduling decisions are concerned?

Impunity for him, maybe, but not for the claimant. 

When a previously continued Termination Hearing is sought to be bumped out again, both times due to scheduling issues with Dr. Zaslavsky, the IAB takes some aggressive action “to lessen the harm to Employer and the Fund”.

Where Dr. Z cancels previously scheduled deposition b/c it now interferes with his Thursday night basketball coaching commitment, the IAB grants Claimant’s request for continuance but also suspends Claimant’s Fund TTD from the current hearing date until a new date 60 days later. They also “freeze the evidence” as of original Hearing date so Employer can avoid the expense of re-deposing Dr. Matz and/or updating the DME.

The rationale for the ruling’s adverse financial impact on the Claimant?

The Board states that “of all the parties, Claimant and Claimant’s counsel are best placed to pressure Dr. Zaslavsky to make himself for deposition promptly.”

I love this Order as it is another example of what I call “Motion Day Magic.”  Snappy little gems of precedent in the jewelry box of the law. (Yvonne Saville, can you relate?) The real magic, however, will be any lawyer’s ability to pressure Dr. Z when the “court” comes beckoning.

Irreverently yours,

Cassandra F. Roberts

P.S. With the all the snow we’ve been having lately, I thought it was only fitting to share this photo of my granddaughters at duPont Country Club’s Frozen Brunch this past weekend.