Donald Smith v. H&H Transportation, Inc., No. A-3568-21 (Dec. 20, 2023)

The Appellate Division affirmed the workers’ compensation order denying the petitioner’s motion for medical/temporary benefits. In January 2017, the petitioner injured his bilateral legs, left hip, and back in a car accident while working for the respondent, H&H Transportation, Inc. Previously, the petitioner had a history of back pain going back to 2005, with a recent CT scan in March 2016.

The petitioner was evaluated by Dr. Anthony Parks, who recommended a second opinion because he could not explain the petitioner’s symptoms in comparison to the MRI findings. The petitioner then saw Dr. Ryan Cassilly, who found that the thoracic and lumbar sprain symptoms were related to the work injury, but the T7-8 herniation found on the MRI was not as it reflected a “long standing degenerative condition.”

Once benefits were terminated, the petitioner then filed a claim petition and saw a neurosurgeon, Dr. Przybylski, on his own. He underwent various procedures, including surgery, and in November 2022, filed a motion for medical/temporary benefits. The petitioner, as well as the three doctors, testified.

The workers’ compensation judge found that: the petitioner’s need for treatment was not causally related; the petitioner’s testimony was not credible; Dr. Cassilly’s testimony was credible; and Dr. Przybylski’s theory was not supported by objective evidence. The petitioner appealed; however, the Appellate Division affirmed, noting the judge’s decision was supported by the record.