Relevancy of Employment Records: A Case Study

What a personal injury plaintiff tells her employer about her injuries is highly relevant evidence to determine the extent of those injuries.  Yet, as I previously posted, some locally argue that a personal injury plaintiff’s employment records are irrelevant unless an income related claim is asserted.  This is still ridiculous, and here is an example of why from a case I handled at the end of 2017.

Plaintiff’s interrogatory responses claimed he missed a single day of work due to the accident at issue.  Months later he then updated his computation of damages, but not his interrogatory response, to assert an income loss for a full month of work.  Then, at deposition, Plaintiff testified that he missed a day of work due to the accident, but also that he was fired due to the accident although later re-hired.  Plaintiff testified that, because of the incident, he failed a required test:

24 Q: And so why were you out for three weeks?
25 A: Because I lost my job. Because of the type of
1 work that I was getting into, I had to take a test to
2 pass in order to continue my employment. And I ended up
3 not passing because of the incident.
4 Q: Okay. And can you explain why that is?
5 A: Well, for one, I couldn’t focus in order to do
6 my test because of the pain and medication that I was on
7 all day long. And the ability not to be really able to
8 walk was an issue. So with that being said, I wasn’t
9 able to really completely focus and grasp the information
10 needed in order to pass.
11 Q: You mentioned that was because you
12 were — partially because you were on some medication.
13 What medication was that?
14 A The tramadol. And then the doctor also — I
15 remember now. The doctor also prescribed me Ibuprofen
16 800s.
17 Q: And those affected your ability to take the
18 test?
19 A: Yes.

Plaintiff testified that he was terminated the week after the incident, because he did not pass a mandatory exam.  He did not pass because his pain medication was too strong and affected his ability to take the test. He was reportedly terminated the week after the incident.

The problem for the Plaintiff was that his employment records did not support this at all. They did not show that he ever took or failed a test.  Nor did they show he was ever terminated from the company.  His timecard documented every time he had worked during the month that he had supposedly been out of work. Further, Plaintiff’s assertion that he was unable to focus due to pain medications was undermined by his pharmacy records.  The test that Plaintiff supposedly failed was a week after the accident, but the pharmacy records showed he did not pick up those prescriptions until two weeks after the incident.  It is rather difficult to be affected by medications you have not taken. That was consistent with the history of dishonesty noted in the employment records. One record noted that he was verbally warned because he “falsified his call notes by adding things he did not do on the call, and he also changed the customer’s email on file without good cause.”

Would this information have been discoverable absent an income based claim?  It should be.  The fact that a person was able to continue working without modification or problem is relevant to a fact finder determining the extent to which the injuries alleged are actually affecting the plaintiff. Here the records destroyed the plaintiff’s credibility and helped lead to a defense decision.