View Shopping Cart  I  View SiteMap

Home Products About Us Contact Us Our Foundation Our Other Companies Pay Invoice
 

Proving Mental & Emotional Injuries


by John D. Winer, Dr. Richard B. Pesikoff, and Dr. Richard T. Goldberg

 

They Make Artificial Limbs, Not Minds

The next time a defense doctor claims that part or all of the injury is in your client’s head, use this book’s questions and the defense doctor’s answers to establish causation of damage more serious than physical injury. 

 

The cost to restore function to a damaged mind can be far larger than what is needed for an injured limb.  But jurors naturally doubt what they cannot see and trust what they can.

Here is practice-proven guidance for bringing the financial exposure of defendants and insurers more in line with the mental and emotional damage your clients have suffered. 

Proving Mental & Emotional Injuries reveals the case workup and persuasion secrets that the lead author used to turn five low-or-no-offer, pure psychological injury cases into seven-figure verdicts.  Step-by-step, you will learn how to convince cynical adjusters, defense attorneys, judges, and jurors of the reality and seriousness of mental and emotional injury cases.

John Winer, Richard Goldberg, and Richard Pesikoff’s new preparation-and-trial manual provides innovative and effective methods and forms for increasing case value.  It walks you issue-by-issue over the causation hurdles and around the privacy pitfalls to larger settlements and verdicts.

Loaded with tips and techniques

The authors have decades of experience with psychological injuries, and share the details of their successful approach.  The following 17 sample tips are pulled from only two of the book’s 34 chapters.

Client interview

  • “Many attorneys make the mistake of deciding acceptability based on the nature, extent, and provability of the injury while forgetting about….”  §1:40

  • “This technique usually results in a multitude of traumatic experiences in the client’s past suddenly being revealed in the interview.”  §1:53

  • “The plaintiff attorney will want to be on the alert for a gradual downward trend in function in the few years before the subject trauma.”  §1:64

  • “The interview will be different in single-trauma than in multiple-trauma cases.  In a single-trauma case, the plaintiff attorney will want to….”  §1:71

Expert testimony

  • “Plaintiff does not necessarily have to call a psychological expert to support a past loss-of-income claim.  It is common in our society for primary-care physicians to take a plaintiff out of work on a ‘stress leave’ for a fairly long period of time.”  §4:11

  • “If the therapist estimates, for example, ten sessions for the patient to stabilize, what he or she really means is that the patient will require at least ten sessions and after ten sessions the therapist will reevaluate the situation.  This is one of many reasons why the plaintiff attorney must prepare the treating therapist in advance.”  §4:25

  • “The phenomenon of a treating therapist testifying differently than an independent expert is not at all uncommon in mental and emotional injury cases.  A more significant problem arises in this regard when plaintiff’s expert testimony regarding prognosis, future treatment needs, and future disability vary greatly from the testimony of the treating therapist.”  §4:26

  • “It is very important in many emotional and mental injury cases (particularly accident and employment cases) that the psychological expert has the ability to come off as somewhat cynical, rather than a naïve person who trusts everything plaintiff reports as gospel.”  §4:144

  • “Reliance upon the treating therapist alone (if there is one) will not substitute for an evaluation by an expert because the treating therapist is normally going to over-rely, or only rely, upon plaintiff’s self-report which may give a very skewed version of the essential issues.”  §4:180

  • “Most plaintiff attorneys, most psychotherapists, and many psychological experts do not understand the importance of establishing a psychodynamic mechanism of an injury.  They tend to think that if plaintiff can establish a difference in post-trauma versus pre-trauma signs and symptoms, that will be enough.  It is critical that….”  §4:181

  • “By examining the plaintiff multiple times before and throughout the course of litigation, plaintiff’s expert should have accumulated many more facts than the defense expert.  And if plaintiff’s expert sees the plaintiff close to the time of trauma and the defense expert does not see the plaintiff until many months later, plaintiff’s expert’s opinion regarding mental state close to the time of trauma should have more credibility.  Furthermore….”  §4:184

Psychological testing

  • “One of the advantages of psychological testing is that some of the projective tests help get at the unconscious material in plaintiff which would not necessarily come out during an examination/interview by plaintiff’s experts.  This information can be very useful in allowing plaintiff’s expert to formulate the critical causation issue in the case.”  §4:201

  • “The problem with some of the psychological tests, particularly MMCI-II and –III, which provide personality disorder scales, is that they tend to be biased in favor of finding evidence of personality disorder in the patient.  It is a favorite trick of defense psychologists and psychiatrists to administer the MMCI-II and –III.”  §4:206

  • “Do not be intimidated by a personality order defense.  If that defense is raised….”  §4:206

  • “Psychological testing can provide some useful, if not definitive, evidence on the causation issue.  For instance, although it is controversial, the MMPI-III has a post-traumatic stress disorder subscale….  The MCM-III has a similar scale which is less controversial.”  §4:207

  • “Be wary of a defense psychologist who scores his or her own MMPI or MCMI tests or has a computer company perform scoring but not produce a narrative printout of the computer findings….  §4:208

Using experts

  • “It has been our experience that the only attorneys satisfied with early reports from psychological experts are attorneys who undervalue psychological injury cases.”  §4:237

  • “If the plaintiff attorney can obtain all of the defense expert’s files, including reports, test results, and interviews, before plaintiff’s psychological expert’s deposition is taken, the plaintiff’s expert will be able to anticipate the defense position and the likely cross examination questions.”  §4:253

  • “One of the most frequent mistakes that plaintiff’s psychological experts and treating psychotherapists make is to diagnose post-traumatic stress disorder simply because….”  §4:260

 

And dozens more.  The book comes with a free CD-ROM that includes searchable full-text of the book, as well as all the forms from the book, which can be accessed and modified with your preferred word processing program--with no installation necessary. 

 Updated annually.  ISBN 1-58012-106-3.  Book Price: $129.00

C7


View and Print the Brochure


Add to Shopping Cart   


Related Titles:

bluearrow.gif (273 bytes) Determining Economic Damages

bluearrow.gif (273 bytes) How Insurance Companies Settle Cases

bluearrow.gif (273 bytes) Maximizing Damages in Small Personal Injury Cases

bluearrow.gif (273 bytes) Medical Evidence

bluearrow.gif (273 bytes) Personal Injury Forms: Discovery & Settlement

   

   Updated 11/11/09