Workers' Compensation

The Difference Between Investigative Pretext and Rule 4.2 Violations

, The Legal Intelligencer


All attorneys who litigate workers' compensation matters on behalf of injured workers in Pennsylvania have seen their fair share of reports from investigators who are employees of companies hired by insurance companies and defense counsel to conduct surveillance of the plaintiff or claimant. In reviewing the reports, one will invariably note phrases such as "verified subject's identity through discreet investigative techniques" or "utilized investigative pretext to verify identity."

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at

What's being said

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202630138792

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.