FORENSIC PODIATRY SERVICES
Forensic Gait Analysis of Surveillance Video in Injury and Workers’ Comp Cases.
Are the alleged injuries and limitations supported by what the footage actually shows?
Surveillance footage is evidence — and like all evidence, it can be misread by either side. Dr. Michael S. Nirenberg, a board-certified forensic podiatrist, analyzes how a claimant walks, stands, lifts, climbs, and bears weight, frame by frame, and compares the footage against the claimed injury and limitations.
Retained by attorneys, the methodology is identical regardless of which side has retained the work. The opinion follows the evidence — which is what makes the analysis durable when challenged.
About the Expert
Forensic experience trusted by attorneys, the Department of Justice, and law enforcement.
- Expert assistance provided to the FBI, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), U.S. and Canadian law enforcement agencies, and attorneys representing plaintiffs, defendants, and insurers
- 33+ years in practice
- Board-certified in Primary Care in Podiatric Medicine and Foot & Ankle Surgery, American Board of Multiple Specialties in Podiatry
- Co-editor of “Forensic Gait Analysis: Principles and Practice,” Taylor & Francis CRC Press
- Over 50 publications; editor for JAPMA and Science & Justice
- 100+ educational presentations to forensic experts, law enforcement, podiatrists, and the public
WHAT THE ANALYSIS EXAMINES
Three things video can reveal — when read by a qualified expert.
Gait is the manner of walking, stepping, weight-bearing, and carriage. It carries objective biomechanical signatures that are difficult to fake convincingly — and equally difficult to read accurately without specialized training. A forensic podiatrist can determine whether surveillance footage is consistent with the medical record, contradicts it, or has been mischaracterized by either side.
The Manner of Walking
1
Frame-by-frame documentation of stance phase, swing phase, heel contact, foot-flat, toe-off, base of gait, arm swing, head and torso position, joint motion, balance, symmetry, and pace.
Frame-by-frame documentation of stance phase, swing phase, heel contact, foot-flat, toe-off, base of gait, arm swing, head and torso position, joint motion, balance, symmetry, and pace.
Weight-Bearing & Function
2
Is the claimant truly avoiding weight on the injured limb, or compensating for it? The footage is measured against the medical records and sworn testimony with specific timestamps.
Is the claimant truly avoiding weight on the injured limb, or compensating for it? The footage is measured against the medical records and sworn testimony with specific timestamps.
Assistive Devices & Context
3
Cane use, braces, footwear, environmental conditions, distance, duration, and effort all matter. The analysis separates incidental activity from genuine functional capacity with rigor.
Cane use, braces, footwear, environmental conditions, distance, duration, and effort all matter. The analysis separates incidental activity from genuine functional capacity with rigor.
THE ANALYSIS WORKS BOTH WAYS
What the record reflected. What the video actually showed.
Surveillance can reveal exaggeration. It can also be cherry-picked, taken out of context, or read by a non-expert as proof of function the footage does not actually demonstrate. A rigorous forensic gait analysis distinguishes the two.
The same frame-by-frame methodology that can identify a malingering claimant can also support a genuinely injured claimant against a misleading edit, a brief clip without context, or an investigator’s report that overstates what the footage shows.
Examples from real matters
Reported: claimant cannot stand on toes of injured foot.
vs
Video: claimant stands on toes while loading vehicle.
Reported: claimant can only walk one block.
vs
Video: claimant ambulatory and active 30+ minutes.
Investigator: “subject ambulates normally.”
vs
Video: clear antalgic gait, shortened stance phase on injured side.
Counsel framing: “claimant carried groceries.”
vs
Video: two light bags, six steps, consistent with stated restrictions.
Reported: claimant requires cane at all times.
vs
Video: claimant recorded without device on multiple occasions.
METHODOLOGY
Built to withstand challenge — from either side.
Every analysis is documented, reproducible, anchored in the medical record and the peer-reviewed literature, and prepared with the understanding that opposing counsel will attempt to impeach it at deposition or trial. Findings are stated only to the extent the evidence supports them.
STEP 01
Scoped Intake
Case posture is reviewed with retaining counsel — alleged injury, reported restrictions, surveillance windows, and the specific questions the trier of fact must answer.
STEP 02
Complete Record Review
All medical records, IME/IPE reports, depositions, and surveillance footage are reviewed in full — not just the segments either side has highlighted.
STEP 03
Documented Gait Analysis
Stance and swing phases, weight-bearing, symmetry, joint motion, assistive-device use, and environmental context documented with timestamps and frame references.
STEP 04
Defensible Written Opinion
A clear, citation-ready report grounded in the medical record and peer-reviewed forensic gait literature. Available for deposition and trial testimony.
“The footage doesn’t favor either side. The opinion shouldn’t either. The methodology is what holds up under cross-examination.”
— Dr. Michael S. Nirenberg, DPM
FOR EITHER SIDE
Retained by attorneys on either side of the same methodology.
A forensic opinion is only as valuable as its credibility on the stand. Findings are not adjusted to fit the retaining party — and counsel on both sides retain us precisely for that reason.
When the footage appears to support the claimant
Supporting genuine injury.
- Rebuttal of investigator reports that overstate or mischaracterize the footage
- Identification of antalgic gait, compensatory movement, and pain behaviors visible on video
- Context-restoration for clips presented out of duration, distance, or environmental context
- Response to opposing gait, biomechanical, or surveillance-based expert opinions
When the footage appears to contradict the claim
Documenting inconsistency.
- Independent expert opinion to support IME conclusions or rebut treating-physician findings
- Frame-by-frame documentation suitable for motion practice and trial exhibits
- Cross-referencing of surveillance to deposition testimony and medical records
- Referrals on suspected malingering or material misrepresentation
CASE TYPES
Where surveillance gait analysis makes a difference.
We accept cases from attorneys, third-party administrators, self-insured employers, insurance carriers, and government agencies. Common matters include:
Workers’ Compensation
/01
Disputed lower-extremity injuries, CRPS/RSD claims, permanency and restriction disputes, return-to-work determinations, IME corroboration, and IME rebuttal.
Disputed lower-extremity injuries, CRPS/RSD claims, permanency and restriction disputes, return-to-work determinations, IME corroboration, and IME rebuttal.
Personal Injury & Auto
/02
MVA cases involving foot, ankle, knee, hip, or back injuries where surveillance has been obtained and the extent of impairment is contested by either side.
MVA cases involving foot, ankle, knee, hip, or back injuries where surveillance has been obtained and the extent of impairment is contested by either side.
Premises Liability & Slip and Fall
/03
Cases where claimed gait impairment, balance problems, or post-fall limitations are either supported or appear inconsistent with documented activity on video.
Cases where claimed gait impairment, balance problems, or post-fall limitations are either supported or appear inconsistent with documented activity on video.
Long-Term & Short-Term Disability
/04
Disability claim investigations and appeals where surveillance behavior is being weighed against reported functional capacity and treating physician opinions.
Disability claim investigations and appeals where surveillance behavior is being weighed against reported functional capacity and treating physician opinions.
SIU & Fraud Investigations
/05
Insurance Special Investigations Unit referrals requiring a credentialed expert opinion before a denial, referral, or fraud action — and rebuttal of the same.
Insurance Special Investigations Unit referrals requiring a credentialed expert opinion before a denial, referral, or fraud action — and rebuttal of the same.
Social Security & Veterans’ Disability
/06
Administrative hearings and appeals where gait, weight-bearing, and functional limitations are central to the disability determination.
Administrative hearings and appeals where gait, weight-bearing, and functional limitations are central to the disability determination.
A note on neutrality. The role of a forensic expert is to provide an honest forensic opinion grounded in the evidence and the peer-reviewed literature — nothing more. Dr. Nirenberg has rendered opinions favorable to plaintiffs, to defendants, to claimants, and to carriers. The opinion follows the footage and the record, not the retainer.
A note on gait analysis. The scope, methodology, and conclusions of any gait analysis and corresponding report may differ from the information presented on this page, contingent upon the specific facts and issues of each individual case.
FREQUENTLY ASKED
Questions counsel tend to ask first.
If you don’t see your question here, reach out directly. Most case-fit conversations take fifteen minutes or less.
Do you favor plaintiff or defense work?
Neither. Cases come from attorneys on both sides. The methodology is identical regardless of who has retained the analysis — and an opinion will not survive cross-examination if it tilts toward the retaining party. The footage and the record dictate the conclusion.
Will you decline a case if the footage doesn’t support the retaining party?
Counsel is told honestly what the footage shows. If the findings don’t help the retaining party’s position, that is communicated before a report is written. This protects counsel from a damaging cross-examination.
Is forensic gait analysis a recognized discipline?
Yes. It is grounded in well-established biomechanical principles and supported by peer-reviewed literature. Findings are tied to specific timestamps and frames, and opinions are stated only to a reasonable degree of medical certainty.
What kind of video do you need?
Standard surveillance footage in common formats (MP4, MOV, AVI) is sufficient, provided resolution and camera angles allow the claimant to be observed walking, standing, or otherwise moving.
What materials should accompany the surveillance?
Ideally: relevant medical records, IME and IPE reports, deposition transcripts of the claimant, the surveillance investigator’s report, and a brief note from counsel describing the specific questions to be addressed.
How long does an analysis take?
Most matters are completed within two to four weeks of receiving the materials, depending on the volume of records, depositions, and footage. Expedited turnaround is available.
Will Dr. Nirenberg testify at deposition or trial?
Yes. Deposition and trial testimony are quoted separately from report preparation.
Can I see Dr. Nirenberg’s CV?
Yes. To request an up-to-date CV, email forensic@friendlyfootcare.com.
What does an engagement cost?
A retainer is required before work begins. Rates depend on the volume of records, hours of surveillance footage, and whether deposition or trial testimony is anticipated.
RETAIN THE EXPERT
Send the footage. We’ll tell you what it actually shows.
A short conversation is usually enough to determine whether forensic gait analysis will help your matter. Reach out with a brief description of the case. We respond within one business day.
PHONE · (219) 663-2273 | EMAIL · forensic@friendlyfootcare.com | LOCATION · Crown Point, Indiana
