Follow us!

    Re: I need the best attorney in the country, period.

    Posted by Daniel on 1/30/04

    On 1/20/04, KnowTooMuch wrote:
    > On 6/26/03, ff wrote:
    >> Daniel:
    >> Suppression/Repression bias at work. Can you include fraud,
    >> in the private sector?
    >> ff
    >> On 6/26/03, Daniel wrote:
    >>> I will make it short and to the point. I need to find the
    >>> best attorney in the country for a Common Pleas Trial Case
    >>> against Workers' Comp, state of Ohio, as it deals with
    >>> Formaldehyde exposure in an inadequately ventilated office
    >>> building. I have been diagnosed by a well-respected MD in
    >>> this specialized field of environmental medicine, with
    >>> permanent disability, with this office environment as the
    >>> cause with a high degree of medical certainty. All
    >>> administrative decisions have been denied. The
    >>> phrase "Multiple Chemical Sensitivity" is not being used as
    >>> the diagnosis, but sensitivity to many environmental
    >>> chemicals.
    >>> Any suggestions, as I have filed the case in Common Pleas
    >>> Court in Ohio, no trial date set as of yet. Date of
    >>> disability goes back to Sept. 15, 1998. Not one penny of
    >>> lost wages or medical bills has been paid by Ohio Workers'
    >>> Compensation, even though Social Security has allowed the
    >>> disability.
    >>> Anyone who enters into this misfortunate arena will be
    >>> dealing with the cards stacked against them, as the system
    >>> is corrupt from political pressures. I have personally
    >>> witnessed this: corrupt IME exams, corrupt Ohio Attorney
    >>> General's office, corrupt Ohio Workers' Compensation
    >>> system. They play with the phrase "Multiple Chemical
    >>> Sensitivity" as if it is taboo. Hence, my case does not
    >>> mention this, yet the IME exam stated this as my alleged
    >>> injury.
    >>> Again, any referrals would be appreciated, as the trial
    >>> would most likely take 1 to 2 days, with a trial attorney
    >>> being the most important aspect in trying to win this
    >>> appeal.
    > Hi There: I just read your unfortunate, too often,
    > situation. What area do you live in? What about Phil
    > Fulton. Great attorney! I worked for one of those doctors,
    > who got the god syndrome a few years back and I quit.

    By Daniel below in resonse:

    I just met with a local attorney in the Youngstown,OH area and
    he has told me that because my treating environmental doctor has
    said that formaldehyde exposure was the result of my now full-
    blown chemical sensitivities, that he would have to prove that
    formaldehyde was in my workplace at the time. However, that was
    4 1/2 years ago. I tried to get someone in from OSHA at the
    time, but they would not come in. However, I explained to this
    attorney during this consult that because the claim was
    dissallowed in all administrative hearings (OHIO) on the basis
    that I had a pre-existing chemical sensitivity to petro-
    chemicals. In the Common Pleas Appeal process, I had to have an
    IME done by one of the state's medical whores. He now asserts
    that I don't have multiple chemical sensitivities.

    Now, there are two important points that result from this ruling
    and IME report. If the ruling said that I was not disallowed
    disability due to the fact that I had a pre-existing chemical
    sensity,(by the way, I did not, as all my previous work records,
    employer statements would support), then the ruling as
    disallowed basically implicated that I was exposed to a
    chemical. You cannot disallow something without knowing what it
    is you are disallowing.

    Second point, the IME. Although the examining doctor is saying
    my alleged claim is for Multiple Chemicle Sensitivity, the claim
    was actually for Chemical Sensitivies. Anyone who knows this
    area certainly is well aware of the distinction put on with the
    term "MULTIPLE" in front of the chemical sensitiviy diagnosis.
    This is not my diagnosis, yet the IME doctor conveniently puts
    that in to the IME report citing different medical studies and
    doctors supporting this unaccepted diagnosis.

    My point is this. If I was dissallowed based on a pre-existing
    chemical sensitivity medical history,(again not true), then how
    can the IME doctor come in and say I don't have chemical
    sensitivities because according to mainstream medical
    literature, such a diagnosis is not accepted as proven?

    Anyone care to comment on this please do. I do not feel
    comfortable going in to a scheduled common pleas court case to
    determine my eligibilty for Ohio Workers' Comp with the
    documentation that I have. There is something missing, and I
    personally believe that it is in the preceding information I
    just supplied.

    I believe a second medical opinion is needed to substantiate my
    case. I am scheduled to see Dr. William Rea in Texas shortly. He
    is probably the most widely renowned expert in the world on
    chemical sensitivities. I hope that this additional medical exam
    and hopeful medical statement by him will substantially add to
    the merits of my claim.

    Posts on this thread, including this one

  Site Map:  Home Chatboards Legal Jobs Classified Ads Search Contacts Advertise
  © 1996 - 2013. All Rights Reserved. Please review our Terms of Use, Mission Statement, and Privacy Policy.

The Counsel.Net ChatBoardsm. All Rights Reserved.