- claims for compensation and issues in dispute,
- stipulations of fact,
- exhibits to be marked for identification at hearing,
- names of witnesses, with summary of their anticipated testimony,
- medical records to be sent to impartial examiner accompanied by an itemized list of those records,
- disclosure questions for the impartial (not to exceed three in number),
- hypotheticals to be sent to impartial
- written objections to medicals submitted, stating reasons therefore,
- name(s) of additional physician(s) for whom, at the time of hearing, it is anticipated either party will request a deposition, and
- whether impartial examination is required.
With the administrative judge's permission, the parties may amend the memorandum at or before the hearing. Documents to be sent to the impartial physician must be submitted in duplicate and arranged in chronological order.
There are no ex parte communications. 452 CMR § 1.17. No party, or representative of a party, involved in a proceeding before an administrative judge (or Reviewing Board) may submit any information, evidence, argument, or advice, whether written or oral, regarding any matter at issue in such proceeding, unless such submission is part of the record, or made in the presence of all parties. When a party to a proceeding submits a letter or any writing to an administrative judge (or Reviewing Board), a copy shall be served by mail, or in hand, on counsel for each party or directly on each other party if not represented.
At a conference where the employee's medical condition is an issue, the parties shall also identify to the administrative judge, as part of the required memorandum, the following:
- the medical issues in dispute,
- the medical specialty of the impartial physician,
- the names of three impartial physicians the parties have agreed on, in order of preference, and
- estimated length of hearing.
Insurer defenses must either be raised at conference or waived. No other medical records will be allowed into evidence at hearing unless admitted by the administrative judge as "newly discovered evidence," or if a party files a motion to submit additional medicals on the grounds of the complexity or inadequacy of the impartial report.