Natalie Bellino v. Verizon Wireless
435 N.J. Super. 85
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | 2014Background
- In Feb. 2010, Bellino, while employed by Verizon, tripped and injured her right hand, right knee, left ankle, and lower back.
- Dr. Lester diagnosed CRPS in the right hand/arm and lumbar strain; he recommended nerve blocks, not approved by insurer.
- Verizon halted medical treatment and temporary benefits after Dr. Gallick stated Bellino could return to work; compensation order later required resumption of treatment.
- From 2010–2011, Bellino underwent multiple evaluations; treating and examining physicians disagreed on whether treatment was needed.
- The judge of compensation found Bellino credible, weighed expert testimony, and ordered continued medical treatment and temporary disability benefits.
- Verizon challenged the decision under the Act’s anti-fraud provision N.J.S.A. 34:15-57.4, claiming false or misleading statements were made by Bellino.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Bellino proved entitlement to medical treatment and temporary disability. | Bellino was in need of treatment and unable to work due to work-related CRPS. | The medical evidence and witnesses undermined Bellino's claimed disability and need for treatment. | Yes; credibility and substantial evidence support entitlement. |
| Whether the anti-fraud provision requires a higher standard of proof (clear and convincing) for finding fraud. | Anti-fraud standard should follow liberal remedial social policy; not necessarily clear and convincing. | Fraud should be proven by clear and convincing standard due to seriousness of the crime. | Standard not reached; court declined to resolve; fraud not proven here. |
| Whether a court may order ongoing temporary disability benefits while resolution of medical clearance is pending. | Continued benefits are appropriate until medically cleared to return to work. | Benefits should be limited by statutory/medical clearance conditions. | Affirmed order requiring benefits until medical clearance or further order. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lombardo v. Revlon, Inc., 328 N.J. Super. 484 (App. Div. 2000) (deference to credibility and weigh competing medical opinions)
- Ramos v. M & F Fashions, Inc., 154 N.J. 583 (1998) (judge's credibility findings accord deference)
- Tlumac v. High Bridge Stone, 187 N.J. 567 (2006) (substantial evidence standard for workers' comp findings)
- Livingstone v. Abraham & Straus, Inc., 111 N.J. 89 (1988) (remedial purpose and liberal construction of the Act)
- Millison v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 101 N.J. 161 (1985) (foundational articulation of workers' compensation purpose)
- Smith v. John L. Montgomery Nursing Home, 327 N.J. Super. 575 (App. Div. 2000) (medical evidence-based weighing of experts)