Medical Evidence: Functional Capacity Evaluations
Rushford v. Montana Contractor Compensation Fund [05/30/14] 2014 MTWCC 16 Although the Court found the FCE evaluator credible, it gave little weight to her FCE results because she found the claimant’s subjective complaints credible where the Court did not. Furthermore, she offered no explanation as to why Petitioner was able to overcome his alleged respiratory difficulties while engaged in recreational activities, but would be unable to do so in an employment context.
|Young v. Liberty Northwest Insurance Corporation [8/25/00] 2000 MTWCC 51 Where physical therapist conducting FCE conceded she took claimant's pain reports at face value, and claimant's statements about her limitations were contradicted by video surveillance, FCE's conclusion that claimant was limited to sedentary-light work for four hours a day were not persuasive.|
|Nielson v. State Fund [9/20/00] 2000 MTWCC 64Court not persuaded by conclusions of Functional Capacity Evaluation where record suggested symptom magnification by claimant during testing and failure of claimant to participate in work conditioning program associated with FCE. Note: In Nielson v. State Compensation Ins. Fund, 2003 MT 95, the Supreme Court reversed and remanded, holding substantial evidence did not support the WCC's conclusion that claimant was not permanently, partially disabled.|