The concept of competing medical experts is commonplace in the realm of personal-injury litigation. No matter on which side of the fence the client resides, it can take a high-caliber “hired gun” to get the job done. In the world of workers’ compensation, a hackneyed dichotomy still worms its way into this battle of the experts in a manner not prevalent in other, less exuberant areas of law. This distinction has come to be known as the treating physician versus the independent medical examiner.
While the seasoned workers’ compensation attorney understands that this supposed distinction is, in most instances, without a difference, it appears that a mindset may still linger among some practitioners who find sport in attacking the fundamental notion of independent medical exams, labeling the examiners biased in every way imaginable.
