Massachusetts Injury Lawyers Blog
Injured employees pursuing workers’ compensation claims must follow specific statutory procedures; if they fail to do so, it can jeopardize their ability to obtain benefits. When a claim involves an uninsured employer, the process becomes even more complicated. A recent Massachusetts ruling illustrates how the courts address noncompliance with procedural obligations and the consequences of prolonged failure to participate in the claims process. If you are pursuing workers’ compensation benefits, you should talk to a Massachusetts workers’ compensation attorney to determine your rights and obligations.
Facts and Procedural History
Allegedly, the employee worked for the employer for a brief period in 2019 and claimed that she fell down a staircase at work on June 1, injuring her back, tailbone, and other areas. The employee did not report the fall to the employer at the time, and no other employee documented the incident. The next day, the employee sought treatment at a medical clinic but did not disclose that she had fallen at work. In the weeks and months that followed, she sought additional treatment but did not identify the location of the alleged fall or initially provide consistent dates for when it occurred.
It is alleged that, because the employer did not maintain valid workers’ compensation insurance, the employee filed a claim with the Workers’ Compensation Trust Fund. The trust fund moved to join the employer, and the employee did not oppose the joinder. The employer challenged liability, average weekly wage, disability, and causal relationship. The employer then sought discovery and arranged multiple medical examinations, including an impartial examination pursuant to G. L. c. 152, § 11A (2). The employee did not respond to the discovery requests and failed to appear for the scheduled impartial examination, prompting the employer to file a motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution.
Reportedly, the administrative judge held a hearing on the motion to dismiss, found the employee not credible, but allowed the claim to proceed so the parties could participate in a mediation session. The mediation did not occur because the employee informed her attorney shortly beforehand that she would not attend due to illness. The administrative judge then scheduled a full evidentiary hearing. On the day before the hearing, the employee sent multiple email messages arguing her case, but did not request a postponement. On the day of the hearing, she sent additional messages but again did not appear. After noting the extended delays, discovery failures, and repeated noncompliance, the administrative judge dismissed the claim with prejudice, concluding that the employee’s conduct had unreasonably obstructed the proceedings. The employee appealed.
Timeliness of Workers’ Compensation Claims
On appeal, the court first addressed the employee’s argument that the employer lacked standing because it lacked workers’ compensation insurance. The court rejected this claim, explaining that once the trust fund joined the employer, the employer could assert any reasonable defenses that would have been available had the employee filed her claim directly against it. This authority is expressly permitted under 452 Code Mass. Regs. § 1.20(2).
The court then considered the administrative judge’s findings regarding the employee’s conduct. It emphasized that credibility assessments and determinations regarding the weight of evidence fall squarely within the administrative judge’s exclusive authority. Because the judge found the employee’s testimony inconsistent and the record showed repeated failures to participate in required procedures, the court held that these findings were final.
The employee also argued that dismissal was improper because G. L. c. 152, § 11A (2), provides for suspension, not dismissal, when a claimant fails to attend an impartial medical examination. The court found this argument misplaced. Section 11A governs only the procedure for appointing and using impartial examiners. It does not limit an administrative judge’s broader authority to dismiss a claim when an employee has failed to meet her evidentiary burden or engage in the adjudicatory process. Because the employee was not receiving benefits, there were no benefits to suspend, and her conduct extended far beyond missing the impartial examination. Her failure to respond to discovery and failure to appear at the final hearing justified dismissal under G. L. c. 152, § 11, and longstanding case law.
Finally, the court rejected the employee’s claim that the proceedings involved conspiracy or misconduct, observing that the record demonstrated reasoned decision-making by the administrative judge and substantial support in the evidence for her findings. The Appeals Court therefore affirmed the decision of the reviewing board.
Consult an Experienced Massachusetts Workers’ Compensation Attorney
If you are dealing with the aftermath of a workplace injury, it is important to receive clear guidance on the benefits available to you and the procedures required to secure them. James K. Meehan of the Law Office of James K. Meehan is an experienced Massachusetts workers’ compensation lawyer who can help you understand your options, gather the necessary evidence, and advocate effectively on your behalf. To speak with Mr. Meehan, call 508-822-6600 or submit a request through the firm’s online contact form to arrange a consultation.