"Sufficient Credible Evidence" - What does this mean?
Appeals of decisions in New Jersey Workers'
Compensation cases are made directly to the Appellate
Division. The 'scope of review' by the appellate
Division is "the same as that on appeal in any
non-jury case, that is, whether the findings made
could reasonably have been reached on sufficient
credible eveidnece present in the record, considering
'the proofs as a whole,' with due regard to the
opportunity of the one who heard the witnesses to
judge of their credibility." Close v. Kordulak
Bros., 44 N.J. 589, 599 (1965), quoting
State v. Johnson, 42 N.J. 146, 162 (1964).
Thus, the findings of fcact made by a judge of
compensation "are entitled to substantial deference."
Ramos v. M & F Fashions, Inc., 154 N.J.
583, 294 (1998).
But how does the appeals Court review cases where there was a significant split - a disagreement - between the doctors who testified in the workers' compensation case? How does the Appellate Divison review a case where the Comp Judge agrees with one side's doctors over the other?
But how does the appeals Court review cases where there was a significant split - a disagreement - between the doctors who testified in the workers' compensation case? How does the Appellate Divison review a case where the Comp Judge agrees with one side's doctors over the other?
"Insofar as medical testimony is concerned, it is
undisputed that the judge of compensation 'is not
bound by the conclusional opinions of any one or
more, or all of the medical experts.' Perez v.
Capitol Ornamental, Concrete Specialties, Inc.,
288 N.J. Super. 359, 367 (app. Div. 1996)
quoting Lightner v. Cohn, 76 N.J.
Super. 461, 465 (App. Div. 1962). "So long as the
Judge's findings are supported by articulated reasons
grounded in the evidence. we must defer to her
expertise in assessing disability." Id.,
citing Lewicki v. N.J. Art Foundry, 88
N.J. 75, 88-90 (1981).
A workers' compensation judge is granted 'deference' because the judge had the opportunity to determine credibility based upon observations of the witness. Perez, supra, at 367. The Appellate Court is obligated to give "due regard to the judge's expertise in the field of workers' compensation and her opportunity of seeing the witnesses and evaluating their credibility." Bradley v. Henry Townsend Moving and Storage Co., 78 N.J. 532, 534 (1979) and Close, supra, at 589. In short, a compensation judge's decision will be affirmed if the appellate court is satisfied that the conclusions the judge reached were supported by sufficient credible evidence at trial.
See gen. Zimbitsky v. County of Morris, A-2429-08T1 (App. Div., decided January 15, 2010).
A workers' compensation judge is granted 'deference' because the judge had the opportunity to determine credibility based upon observations of the witness. Perez, supra, at 367. The Appellate Court is obligated to give "due regard to the judge's expertise in the field of workers' compensation and her opportunity of seeing the witnesses and evaluating their credibility." Bradley v. Henry Townsend Moving and Storage Co., 78 N.J. 532, 534 (1979) and Close, supra, at 589. In short, a compensation judge's decision will be affirmed if the appellate court is satisfied that the conclusions the judge reached were supported by sufficient credible evidence at trial.
See gen. Zimbitsky v. County of Morris, A-2429-08T1 (App. Div., decided January 15, 2010).
