ALAN LONGSTREET VS. COUNTY OF MERCER (DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION), A-3361-15T2

Background

Alan Longstreet, a Mercer County heavy equipment operator, claimed he was injured while plowing snow on Nursery Road on January 27, 2015, when his grader struck a manhole cover and snapped both blades.
Longstreet testified he switched from loading salt with a front-end loader to plowing in grader #57 at around midnight, brought a damaged 2003 New Holland grader to the County shop, and did not operate the grader after the repair.
County GPS records (produced at trial) showed grader #57 parked at the county airport around midnight, moved to I‑95 at ~2:00 a.m., remained stationary until 6:38 a.m., and was on Nursery Road only between 7:30 a.m. and 10:17 a.m.
A repair order for the 2003 New Holland grader bore the number "57"; the County maintained the New Holland and grader #57 were the same vehicle and produced GPS data for it.
The workers’ compensation judge found Longstreet proved a compensable accident, inferring he had operated two different graders that night (switching vehicles) and drew an adverse inference against the County for not producing separate GPS data for the New Holland grader.
The Appellate Division reversed and remanded for a new trial before a different judge, holding the judge’s inference that Longstreet operated two graders was unsupported by the evidence and that drawing a negative inference was an abuse of discretion absent proof the vehicles were different.

Issues

Issue	Longstreet's Argument	County's Argument	Held
Whether Longstreet proved he was involved in a compensable on‑the‑job accident while plowing at ~4:00 a.m.	He testified he struck a manhole cover while operating a grader, causing injury and blade damage; repair order corroborates damaged grader	GPS and county records showed grader #57 was stationary and not on Nursery Road at that time, undermining his account	Reversed and remanded: trial judge’s finding that he operated two graders (to reconcile GPS) is unsupported; new trial ordered
Whether judge permissibly inferred Longstreet used two different graders (switched vehicles) to reconcile conflicting evidence	Implicitly: repair order and testimony indicate he operated the grader he brought to the shop	GPS data for grader #57 contradicts Longstreet’s timeline; County says New Holland and #57 are same vehicle	Appellate court: no evidence Longstreet drove two graders; inference unreasonable and unsupported
Whether adverse (negative) inference against County for failure to produce GPS for 2003 New Holland grader was proper	Argued County’s omission supports Longstreet’s version	County produced GPS for grader #57 and said the New Holland was the same vehicle; no proof of distinct vehicles	Adverse inference was an abuse of discretion because County produced GPS for the vehicle identified as #57 and no evidence showed the New Holland was a different vehicle
Whether trial judge correctly weighed medical causation evidence (Dr. Weiss v. Dr. Hu)	Dr. Weiss tied injuries to the accident; Longstreet relied on that expert	County relied on treating physician Dr. Hu for contrary causation opinion	Not reached on merits; remanded for retrial where judge may bifurcate and decide accident threshold first

Key Cases Cited

Close v. Kordulak Bros., 44 N.J. 589 (standard of appellate review of trial factfinding)
Sager v. O.A. Peterson Constr. Co., 182 N.J. 156 (appellate review principles reiterated)
Rova Farms Resort v. Investors Ins. Co., 65 N.J. 474 (deference to trial court unless findings offend interests of justice)
Rapp v. Pub. Serv. Coordinated Transp., Inc., 15 N.J. Super. 305 (requirements for reasonable inferential deductions of fact)
N.J. Div. of Child Prot. & Permanency v. K.G., 445 N.J. Super. 324 (abuse of discretion standard for evidentiary rulings)
Bldg. Materials Corp. of Am. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 424 N.J. Super. 448 (appellate review of adverse inference evidentiary rulings)