back in 2000 my husband fell off thr roof at work and was going through workman's comp. he was seeing a neurosurgeon.after mri's and other test, his docter told him that he had a pinched nerve and wanted to do surgery to grind the disc away from the nerve and place a cushion around it.then two days before he was to have the surgery, he was in a car accident, so his docter postponed the surgery to do more mri's and a mylogram to see if any more damage had been done from the car wreck. after getting the results back, his docter informed him that now he would have to have surgery to remove three of his disc and put a rod in his back. well, at the deposition with the docter concerning the car wreck it was discovered that he was keeping two seperate files on my husband. one for workman's comp. and one for the car wreck. one week he would see my husband for workman's comp, and prescribe his meds.,lorcet 10, soma and xanax, then two weeks later would see him again for the car wreck, also prescribing lorcet 10, soma and xanax.he was bieng double paid. once from workman's comp. then once from our attorney. when this was discovered at the deposition, it totally ruined my husband's case because the docter is not considered to be a credible witness.this car wreck should have paid out largely because my husband was hit by an airport shuttle bus and the driver addmitted he was in the wrong.but now because of the docter keeping two different files with two different diagnosis (within two weeks of one another) when going to his workmans comp. appt. the files said he was in some pain, but not that bad off, then two weeks later at the car wreck appt. his file says he is in severe pain constantly, needs a cane to walk, and has to wear a back brace.because of his greediness for money, he made sure to kep his files straight as to the damage inflicted on my husband. now because of this, the insurance company believes he was doctering the recorda and that my husband was not injured more from the car wreck. would this be considered medical malpractice and could we sue the docter?

It is unlikely. It is not unusual actually, for a doctor to treat a patient for both work related and non-work related issues. In that case, the records should be separate. I can't comment on the accuracy of his records nor why he was seeing your husband every other week. I will say that if the records where he was treating him for the work injury reflected only the disability related to the work injury, that is not improper nor is it uncommon. WC would not pick up the treatment required as a result of the subsequent accident. If the two were indistinguishable, meaning the same body part was affected and now he requires a more significant procedure as a result of the car accident, WC is not going to cover that. It is not clear how related the two injuries were and whether it was appropriate for the doctor to treat them independently. You had to realize that things were being billed this way since those not attributed to WC would be billed to your insurance. Did he ever question why this was being done?

Whether this doctor was treating your husband's injuries appropriately I can not say. You are welcome to discuss it with a lawyer but one would need to review the treatment records in their entirety in order to determine if care was appropriate.

both of the injuries my husband was being treated for was for his back, with the docter claiming injuries worsened by car wreck. he was billing w/c and our attorney...we did not have insurance.now because of the docters records the insurance company for the defense is trying to say that the docter was "doctering"the files so that he could his injuries look worse. this lawsuit has been going on for three years now and up until they had the deposition with the docter, this case was worth alot of money. now, my husband will be lucky if he walks away from all of this with $5,000.00, which was their original offer in the very beginning of this.it is just so very frustrating.as it is , the docter did not go to the deposition willingly. the court had to actually supeona him and the records b/c he did not want to turn them over. he knew what he was doing. thank you anyway for your advice and i will speak to an attorney to see what can be done.

If the subsequent accident worsened his condition but the doctor was still billing WC for the cost of treatment of the new injury, yeah, that is wrong. It is called fraud and it is a huge problem legally. Incidentally, if there is active litigation or the case is being contested, the usual method of obtaining records is by subpeona. Same for calling him as a witness. That way the request is on the record. That in and of itself is not problematic.

I would advise you to speak to a personal injury attorney or preferably one who specializes in both WC and PI. It is very possible that you have a claim against whomever caused the accident. If you do file a claim, it is very possible it will be subrogated. You most certainly are going to want an attorney on your side as it gets very complex when a third party claim is involved.