Practice Areas & Industries: Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, P.C.

 





Group Profile Lawyers in this Group Offices Locations for this Group
 

Practice/Industry Group Overview

The Workers' Compensation Practice Group is devoted to the exclusive representation of employers and insurance carriers. While many of the attorneys in this group have a background in civil litigation, each one focuses their practice solely on the defense of workers' compensation matters. Our attorneys are well versed in the intricacies of this nuanced practice, and due to their constant presence in the courts where they practice, they have become well respected by the judges before whom they regularly appear and the attorneys against whom they compete.

Workers' compensation is a fast-paced practice that requires a high degree of familiarity with the law. Our attorneys are involved in all aspects of workers' compensation from the infancy of a claim through practice in the appellate courts. We are vigorous litigators who also recognize that litigation is not always the primary focus of an employer's successful workers' compensation program. Significant monetary savings can be achieved through the effective management of workers' compensation plans and innovative return-to-work programs. Our attorneys are on the cutting edge of case law development and are able to assist in the design, implementation and continuation of such programs.

As workers' compensation has become increasingly sophisticated, we have expanded our scope of practice. In addition to providing our regular services, we also support clients in areas that have become tangential to the workers' compensation practice.

Workers' Compensation Fraud
Fraud contributes significantly to the cost of doing business and negatively impacts employers, insurance carriers and third party administrators. We can facilitate the filing of a fraud claim through local government agencies and review all cases for civil remedies to help our clients recoup some of the monies expended due to fraudulent cases.

Unemployment Compensation
There is increased interplay between unemployment compensation and workers' compensation cases. We can assist our clients in assessing their need for counsel in unemployment cases and can also answer specific questions on how to handle unemployment cases.

Medicare Set-Asides
Our attorneys regularly advise and counsel clients in matters related to Medicare Set-Asides. Led by James Pocius, who was actively involved in the creation and refinement of the regulations, our group is well versed in the workings of the federal and state liability systems as well as the workers' compensation systems of various states. We can assist our clients with Medicare Set-Aside allocations for workers' compensation and liability cases, Medicare eligibility searches, Medicare submissions to the agency for approval, conditional payment searches and revisions of Medicare Set-Aside allocations.

Fee Reviews
Fee reviews have become an increasingly important component of workers' compensation cases in Pennsylvania. We have identified the problems associated with the fee review system and developed a practice in Pennsylvania where our attorneys are involved at the initiation of the fee review process and aggressively represent our clients' interests through the fee review hearings. Medical providers are able to use the fee review process to challenge the timeliness or amount of medical payments made by the employer/carrier. Since a provider's allegations are accepted at face value during the initial stages of the fee review process, many unjust initial determinations are issued. Attorneys in each of our Pennsylvania offices have extensive experience with the issues that arise during fee reviews and have a thorough understanding of CPT codes, appropriate levels of treatment, appropriate types of treatment and how to win these cases in an efficient and cost effective manner.


 
Past Seminar Materials
  Workers' Compensation 101 Roundtable, Mary S. Kohnke Wagner and Anthony Natale, Speakers, Sheraton Harrisburg-Hershey, Harrisburg, PA, June 8, 2012
 
 
Articles Authored by Lawyers at this office:

House Bill 373 Enacted to Control the Level of Workers’ Compensation Insurance Premiums by Making Significant Changes in the Medical Reimbursements Allowable Under the Healthcare Payment System
Paul V. Tatlow, August 06, 2014
This Act makes substantial changes to Titles 18 and 19 of the Delaware Code designed to control the level of workers’ compensation premiums in Delaware. The most significant changes are: (a) a 33% reduction in medical costs to the workers’ compensation system, phased in over a period of...

Employer Bears Burden of Proving Claimant’s Loss of Earning Power is Due to Lack of U.S. Citizenship
Francis X. Wickersham, August 05, 2014
The claimant filed a claim petition alleging that he sustained a work injury on July 19, 2008, while working as a truck driver for the employer. At a hearing held before the Workers’ Compensation Judge, the employer’s attorney cross examined the claimant, who was born in Ecuador and had...

An Order Denying Claim Made against Uninsured Employers Guaranty Fund Based on Untimely Notice Was Properly Reversed When Evidence Showed That Claimant Did Not Know of Employer’s Uninsured Status until Being Notified of That Possibility by the Bureau
Francis X. Wickersham, July 01, 2014
The claimant worked for the employer as a mechanic and sustained a compression fracture injury in the course and scope of his employment. The claimant filed a claim petition, and the employer did not respond. The claimant attempted to have medical bills paid through the employer’s automobile...

Appellate Division Affirms Perceived Inadequate Fee Award on Motion for Medical and/or Temporary Benefits
Dario J. Badalamenti, July 01, 2014
On July 13, 2007, the petitioner was injured when he slipped and fell on the respondent’s premises. Prior to filing a claim with the Division of Workers’ Compensation, the petitioner’s injury was deemed compensable by the respondent’s workers’ compensation carrier, and...

Award of Benefits Reversed Due to Failure to Properly Weigh the Testimony of Petitioner’s and Respondent’s Competing Medical Experts
Dario J. Badalamenti, July 01, 2014
The petitioner had been employed as a fleet service agent with the respondent since 1981. His job responsibilities included loading and unloading baggage from planes, working in the bag room, placing baggage on carts, driving diesel and gas tugs, driving the equipment to move planes from the ramp...

Employer Has Legal Basis to Deny Paying for Claimant’s Narcotic Medication on Causation Grounds Because Claimant Was Arrested and Charged with Illegally Selling the Medication Prescribed for His Work Injury
Paul V. Tatlow, July 01, 2014
The claimant had sustained a low back injury on July 26, 2011, which was accepted as compensable. He underwent two back surgeries and was receiving narcotic medications. His total disability benefits had been terminated in February 2014, and he was receiving partial disability benefits. In March...

Insurer Entitled to Subrogation under §319 of PA Workers’ Compensation Act for Injuries Sustained by Claimant While Driving Out of State during the Course and Scope of Employment
Francis X. Wickersham, July 01, 2014
The claimant was injured in a motor vehicle accident that took place in Delaware while in the course and scope of her employment, and she received workers’ compensation benefits pursuant to the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act. The claimant then reached a settlement of a third...

Modification Petition is Based on Results of Ire Was Properly Dismissed Because Ire Physician Failed to Satisfy §306 (a.2) Of Act by Not Being Active in Clinical Practice for At Least 20 Hours per Week
Francis X. Wickersham, July 01, 2014
The claimant was receiving workers’ compensation benefits for injuries he sustained in a work-related motor vehicle accident. The employer filed a request with the Bureau to designate a physician to perform an IRE. The physician selected performed the IRE and concluded that the claimant had...

New Jersey Supreme Court Reverses an Appellate Division Decision Employing an Overly Expansive Interpretation of the Premises Rule
Dario J. Badalamenti, July 01, 2014
As the petitioner’s employer, the respondent assigned the petitioner free parking at a private garage located about two blocks from her workplace. The respondent paid for 65 parking spaces for its employees at this private garage, provided each employee with a scan card so that they could...

Presumption of Prejudice Does Not Exist in Every Case Where an Employer Seeks to Recover an Overpayment of Compensation Made to a Claimant Who is Also Receiving a Pension
Francis X. Wickersham, July 01, 2014
The claimant, a firefighter, sustained a work injury. The employer accepted liability and paid the claimant Heart and Lung benefits equal to his full salary for over a year after the injury. The claimant then elected to take a disability pension, and the Heart and Lung benefits were replaced with...

Is Paying Temporary Total Disability Benefits Still an Admission of Liability In New Jersey Workers’ Compensation?
Kristy Olivo Salvitti, June 06, 2014
Respondent attorneys have long advised their clients not to fear the admission of liability when paying medical benefits based on N.J.S.A. 34:15-15. This section clearly states that “[t]he mere furnishing of medical treatment or the payment thereof by the employer shall not be construed to be...

Tooey—The Impact on the Employer Exclusivity Protection Long Afforded by the Act
Jennifer Timmeney Callahan, June 04, 2014
Prior to the implementation of workers’ compensation laws in the United States, civil lawsuits were the only avenue for an employee to seek compensation for job-related accidents. However, the system heavily favored the employer. An employee had to prove employer negligence. The employer, in...

Is Paying Temporary Total Disability Benefits Still an Admission of Liability In New Jersey Workers’ Compensation?
Kristy Olivo Salvitti, May 29, 2014
Respondent attorneys have long advised their clients not to fear the admission of liability when paying medical benefits based on N.J.S.A. 34:15-15. This section clearly states that “[t]he mere furnishing of medical treatment or the payment thereof by the employer shall not be construed to be...

Tooey—The Impact on the Employer Exclusivity Protection Long Afforded by the Act
Jennifer Timmeney Callahan, May 29, 2014
Prior to the implementation of workers’ compensation laws in the United States, civil lawsuits were the only avenue for an employee to seek compensation for job-related accidents. However, the system heavily favored the employer. An employee had to prove employer negligence.