Capehart Scatchard’s Workers’ Compensation Department has one of the largest workers’ compensation practices in the State of New Jersey with regular court lists in every venue of the State. Our compensation lawyers have established a fine reputation for aggressive claims handling. We regularly counsel clients, including our corporate clients, in the proper handling of work-related injuries prior to the inception of litigation. Should litigation become necessary, we have broad experience in litigating matters at the trial level as well as appeals before the Appellate Division and New Jersey Supreme Court.
The Department boasts three lawyers who have been named Certified Workers’ Compensation Lawyers as designated by the New Jersey Supreme Court and three lawyers who are Fellows of the College of Workers’ Compensation Lawyers.
The Department has published a number of articles on various subjects listed below. Also, the Department features John H. Geaney’s New Jersey Workers’ Compensation Manual for Attorneys, Physicians, Adjusters and Employers.
Legal Services
As a service to our clients, we offer on-site seminars and weekly blogs covering the New Jersey Workers’ Compensation Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act.
Some of the Representative Matters we have handled include:
- Catastrophic claims, including cases involving paraplegia and quadriplegia where home modifications and accessible vans were required
- Dependency claims
- Fraudulent claims
- Longshore
- Medicare Secondary Payer
- Medicare Set-Asides and Conditional Payments
- New Jersey Medicaid Liens
- Occupational cases
- Psychiatric claims
- Second Injury Fund cases and total disability claims
- Traumatic accident claims
Representative Industries and Clients
Private Entities
- Amazon
- Bed Bath & Beyond
- Costco
- E.I. duPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
- ExxonMobil
- Fresenius Medical
- Marriott Hotels
- Meridian Health System
- National Freight
- New Jersey Transit
- New Jersey Turnpike Authority
- Nordstrom Princeton University
- Schneider Trucking
- Sears Holdings
- United Airlines
- Verizon
- Wawa
- Weyerhaeuser
- Whole Foods
Hospitals
- Atlantic Health System
- Hackensack Meridian Hospital
- Holy Name Hospital
- Holy Redeemer Hospital
- Meridian Health System
- RWJBarnabas Health
- St. Peter’s Hospital
- Trinitas Hospital
Insurance Companies and Third-Party Administrators
- ACE/ESIS
- AIG
- Amtrust Group
- Broadspire
- CCMSI
- Corvel
- Crum & Forster
- D&H Alternative Risk Solutions
- Gallagher Bassett
- Inservco Insurance Services
- Liberty Mutual Insurance Company
- PMA Insurance Company and Management Group
- Qual-Lynx
- Sedgwick
- Travelers Insurance Company
- Zurich Insurance Company
Public Sector
- 120 New Jersey school boards including Burlington County Insurance Pool Joint Insurance Fund, Gloucester, Cumberland, Salem School District Joint Insurance Fund, New Jersey Schools Insurance Group, Northeast Bergen County School Board Insurance Group, Pooled Insurance Program of New Jersey.
- Burlington County Municipal Joint Insurance Fund, Camden County Municipal Joint Insurance Fund, Central Jersey Joint Insurance Fund, Garden State Municipal Joint Insurance Fund, Middlesex County Joint Insurance Fund, Professional Municipal Management Joint Insurance Fund, Somerset County Insurance Fund Commission, Statewide Joint Insurance Fund, Tri County Joint Insurance Fund
- Rutgers University
- Delaware River Port Authority, New Jersey Transit and New Jersey Turnpike Authority
- Burlington, Cumberland, Essex, Gloucester, Mercer, Monmouth and Salem Counties
- Teaneck Township, Village of Ridgewood, Manalapan-Englishtown-Regional Schools Board of Education, Gloucester Township, Gloucester Board of Education, Pennsauken Board of Education, Franklin (Somerset) Board of Education, New Brunswick Board of Education, Brick Board of Education, Freehold Board of Education, Montclair Board of Education and Passaic Board of Education (all stand-alone self-insured entities)
- State of New Jersey
Practice Highlights
Trial Attorney: Ana-Eliza T. Bauersachs, Esq.
Brief Attorney: Katherine H. Geist, Esq.
The petitioner filed a Motion for Medical and Temporary Disability Benefits in which she initially only sought treatment for the right shoulder. However, two additional claim petitions were filed alleging occupational exposure and a specific injury.
Decision: Judge Thuring found that the petitioner failed to provide any evidence that she was placed out of work for a work-related condition. Therefore, absent evidence that petitioner was placed out of work for the work-related injuries, the request for additional temporary disability benefits was denied.
With respect to the back, Judge Thuring opined that the petitioner failed to show that she needed causally-related back treatment. Concluded that the petitioner sustained a lumbar sprain which had completely resolved and was not entitled to any authorized treatment.
With respect to the right shoulder derivative injury, the Judge agreed with the respondent expert’s conclusion that the right shoulder pathology is degenerative in nature and not related to the workers’ compensation claim.
Trial Attorney: Michael L. Bileci, Esq.
Petitioner alleged that occupational exposure due to constant and repetitive work for a period of 13 months caused injury to her lumbar spine. Respondent denied the claim and petitioner filed a Motion for Medical Treatment. Trial began before Judge French with testimony of the petitioner who denied a prior history of lumbar complaints. Subsequently, respondent secured prior accident records that included a positive MRI of the lumbar spine and pain management treatment records that included epidural steroid injections. This was directly contrary to what the petitioner claimed during her testimony.
Decision: Based upon the prior treatment records directly contradicting the petitioner’s testimony, the judge dismissed the Motion for Medical Treatment and the Claim Petition was subsequently dismissed.
Trial Attorney: John Geaney, Esq.
Brief Attorney: Keith Nagy, Esq.
The petitioner sustained a compensable low back injury in October 2009 lifting garbage cans at work. He received treatment and was discharged in January 2010 with a final diagnosis of a sprain and strain superimposed on preexisting degenerative disc disease and disc space collapse at L5-S1. Petitioner argued that the work injury objectively worsened his spine, leading to an MRI done in July 2010 and then three level fusion surgery in 2014. Petitioner sought 40% partial permanent disability causally related to the work accident.
At trial, respondent proved petitioner had a prior MRI in July 2009 which appeared to be related to pain while vacuuming in his own home. Respondent argued that the MRI of July 2009 was essentially the same as the MRI of July 2010, which was proof that there was no objective change between petitioner’s spine caused by the work injury of October 2009.
Decision: Judge Thuring dismissed the case and found petitioner was entitled to no compensation for his fusion surgery.
Trial and Brief Attorney: Nicholas A. Dibble, Esq.
Petitioner suffered a compensable ankle injury and received a month of authorized ankle treatment. Thereafter she went to the authorized treating orthopedist and complained of right hip pain. When right hip treatment was denied the petitioner filed a Motion for Medical and Temporary Benefits. Respondent sent petitioner for a need for treatment evaluation with Dr. Wayne Colizza who diagnosed the petitioner with a torn labrum, but did not causally relate the need for treatment to the compensable work accident. Instead, Dr. Colizza opined that a subsequent gym injury was the more likely cause of the petitioner’s need for right hip treatment.
At trial before Judge Gavejian, petitioner and her expert, Dr. Fred Lee, offered testimony. Respondent’s expert, Dr. Colizza, and a nurse case manager, to corroborate the findings of Dr. Colizza and the dearth of hip complaints in the authorized medical treatment records, testified.
Decision: After reviewing trial briefs from both sides, Judge Gavejain dismissed the Motion for Medical and Temporary Benefits and found the petitioner was entitled to no treatment relative to her right hip.
