Sunday, September 9, 2012

Dr. Peeples in Benton County, Arkansas – June 2012


On June 13, I had my second opportunity to see first-hand the good Dr. Earl Peeples testify against one of my clients.  The first time did not end so well.  The second time, however, was different; and the tactics of Dr. Peeples and the insurance company that hired him were not convincing to the jury.
My client Sondra had been injured in a car wreck in November 2006.  Sondra was 67 years old at the time and a wonderfully active person, enjoying hiking and walking, boating and spending long hours browsing craft shows with her family and friends.  When she was struck from behind, however, that changed forever.  Since then, she has dealt with pain and discomfort as well as limitations to what she can do physically.  Before the wreck, Sondra had a minimal medical history…very rarely even seeing a doctor.  Very simply, she had great health and an attitude that if “it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” 

Dr. Peeples, as he often does, performed a records-only review.  Essentially, he looked at a large set of Sondra’s medical records and, as if on cue, determined that the wreck had only caused her a sprain and/or strain to her neck and back.  In doing so, however, Dr. Peeples helped us prove our case.

Dr. Peeples issued a written report of his findings after reviewing Sondra’s records.  His report quickly began by highlighting Sondra’s history of what Dr. Peeples calls her “poorly controlled diabetes.”  He then proceeded to list and discuss the records he had reviewed and on which he based his opinion.

Interestingly, however, Dr. Peeples did not mention, even one time, the primary care physician that Sondra first visited and who treated her consistently for the months to come which included a prescription to physical therapy and referral for chiropractic treatment.

Even more interesting, though, was Dr. Peeples statement of how Sondra had been “thoroughly evaluated by radiographs and the ER physician following the motor vehicle accident.”  His report went on to say that “no other treatment other than the emergency room evaluation to rule out significant injury was required….” 

These sections of his report were interesting because in fact, Sondra never went to the ER, nor was ever treated or evaluated there.  Very simply, a key portion of Dr. Peeples’ opinion was at best completely mistaken or at worst completely false. 

When questioned about this at trial, Dr. Peeples, of course, attempted to explain it away.  His non-mention of Sondra’s primary care physician was chalked up to an oversight of not including the doctor’s name.  But, what about the records, Dr. Peeples?  His reliance on phantom records from the ER was chalked up to a typographical mistake:  he meant to write “PCP” (for primary care physician) and instead inadvertently wrote “ER” (for emergency room).  That was plausible at first glance, but far less so when it was pointed out that in his final summary he stated “emergency room evaluation….” (not exactly a “typo!”)  And coupled with the complete absence of mentioning Sondra’s primary care physician, this certainly begs the question, “Dr. Peeples, what records did you really review?”

Dr. Peeples, as he often does, chalked everything up to “pre-existing and aging changes….” He explained to the jury (many of whom were over 65 years old) how the human body will simply heal from a strain or sprain in a matter of weeks…and that no treatment will help that process. 

The jury was not convinced.  On our side, two expert witnesses testified: Dr. John Unruh, a chiropractor in Rogers, AR who treated Sondra for several months and Dr. Jon Huskins, a long-time family practice doctor in Rogers, AR who had evaluated Sondra for an impairment rating.  Each agreed that Sondra had those “pre-existing and aging changes” that Dr. Peeples so loves to point out.  Dr. Unruh and Dr. Huskins, however, explained what I think the jury already knew: an elderly person does not heal the same way he or she did when 18 years old!  Very importantly, Dr. Unruh and Dr. Huskins each explained that a person can have “pre-existing and aging changes” without having any symptoms whatsoever….but when certain trauma occurs (like a rear-end collision), the conditions can become symptomatic…and that is what they believed to have caused Sondra’s pain. 

Long before trial, the only offer to settle was for $2,500.  We refused it and no other offers were made.  It was easy: Sondra’s medical bills were over $20,000 and her life had been changed.  She was more than willing to risk $2500 for her day in court.  Sondra got that day (2 actually) and it paid off.  She won a verdict for $30,000!

Jeremy Ament
Attorney at Law

1 comment:

  1. Hello!

    I get knowledge after read your blog primary care physician that Sondra first visited and who treated her consistently for the months to come which included a prescription to physical therapy and referral for chiropractic treatment and more.

    Fayetteville Orthopaedic Clinic

    ReplyDelete