Dr. W. Gary Snow

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits for rehabilitation and care services following a 1993 motor vehicle accident.

The insurer denied the claims, arguing the applicant's pervasive physical, cognitive, and psychological conditions were not caused by the accident.

The arbitrator dismissed the applicant's claims, finding she failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the accident materially contributed to her impairments.

The arbitrator noted a complete absence of pre-accident medical records, relying solely on the applicant's unreliable self-reporting, and drew an adverse inference from her failure to call pre-accident treating physicians or lay witnesses to corroborate her pre-accident health and functional abilities.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and claimed statutory accident benefits, including income replacement and housekeeping expenses, arguing she could no longer work as a live-in housekeeper.

The arbitrator found that while the applicant sustained genuine injuries, including vertigo and cervicogenic pain, she exaggerated her limitations and was only disabled from working until her employer returned from Florida on February 21, 1996.

Income replacement benefits were awarded up to that date, along with a 50% special award because the insurer unreasonably withheld payment despite having uncontradicted medical evidence of disability for that initial period.

Claims for ongoing income replacement, housekeeping, and a case manager were dismissed.

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received income replacement benefits until the insurer terminated them.

The applicant brought a motion for interim benefits, arguing the insurer failed to comply with the benefit stoppage provisions under section 64 of the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.

The arbitrator held that to obtain interim benefits, an applicant must establish a prima facie case for entitlement and a sense of urgency.

The arbitrator found that the medical evidence raised the possibility that the applicant's cognitive problems resulted from non-accident related causes, such as age-related dementia.

As the applicant failed to present sufficient evidence or legal arguments to establish a prima facie case for entitlement, the motion for interim benefits was dismissed.