I was trolling Pinterest for ideas for our cml's party at next year's bureau conference (yes, I know it isn't until May 2016!) and I came across a new favorite quote:
It's not the lie that bothers me; it's the insult to my intelligence that I find offensive.
And that one sentence sums up my favorite kind of days! I love nothing more than cross-examining individuals who boldly lie in the face of solid evidence to the contrary of their contentions.
Some of my favorites:
"It was a good day," to explain away surveillance showing activities which are inconsistent with their claimed limitations.
"I never had back problems before. The chiropractor was just working on my neck," despite voluminous records showing prior treatment.
"I loved my job! I would give anything to go back!" (Especially fun when the claimant was a two week employee with a sporadic work history.)
The key to defending workers' compensation cases in Pennsylvania comes down to proving that the claimant lacks credibility. If a claimant is found to lack credibility, that credibility determination cannot be disturbed on appeal. And generally speaking, it is very hard for a claimant to meet his or her burden of proof when his or her testimony is rejected.
So, I long to be lied to when questioning witnesses. And I hope that the WCJ feels the same insult to his or her intelligence that I do in those moments.