Hintz v. Farmers Co-op Assn.
297 Neb. 903
| Neb. | 2017Background
- On Nov. 13, 2014, Ian Hintz was injured at work when a semitrailer tire exploded; he was thrown about 10 feet, had transient leg numbness and hip/groin pain, left work that day, and returned the following Monday.
- Hintz did not seek immediate medical care after Nov. 13; coworkers and payroll records indicated he performed full job duties in the intervening period.
- On Dec. 4, 2014, Hintz tripped on home stairs, reinjured his right hip, sought treatment the next day, underwent MRI showing a labral tear, and had hip arthroscopy on Feb. 25, 2015.
- Medical opinions conflicted: Dr. Harris (surgeon) believed the tear was more consistent with a high-energy work injury; Dr. Gallentine said causation was uncertain and deferred to Harris; Dr. Bozarth (defense reviewer) concluded the work injury had resolved and the stair fall caused the symptomatic right hip injury.
- The Workers’ Compensation Court found Hintz’s work injury resolved within 3 days and denied benefits; the Court of Appeals reversed and remanded to reconsider in light of competent medical causation evidence; the Nebraska Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the compensation court’s decision.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Hintz) | Defendant's Argument (Farmers) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Hintz’s hip injury and resulting disability were caused by the Nov. 13 work accident or by the Dec. 4 stair fall | The hip labral tear and ensuing disability were caused by the Nov. 13 tire explosion and symptoms persisted after that incident | The work injury resolved within days; the symptomatic right hip injury was caused by the Dec. 4 fall at home | Held for Farmers: competent evidence supports finding the work injury resolved and the Dec. 4 fall caused the symptomatic hip injury |
| Whether the compensation court properly credited medical experts | Harris’s surgical observations support causation from the work event | Bozarth’s review and other evidence support resolution of work injury and causation from the stair fall; the court may disbelieve Harris’s opinion as premised on inconsistent history | Held: trier of fact appropriately weighed conflicting expert opinions and rejected Harris as lacking a credible foundation |
| Admissibility/competency of a medical opinion based on records review | (Implicit) Harris’s opinion is more probative due to direct surgical observation | Bozarth’s record-review opinion is competent medical evidence and admissible | Held: Opinions based on review of others’ exams/tests are admissible; Bozarth’s opinion was competent and correctly considered by the compensation court |
| Standard of appellate review of Workers’ Comp factual findings | (Implicit) court of appeals should credit Harris and remand | Farmers: appellate court must defer to compensation court and view evidence in light most favorable to successful party | Held: Supreme Court reversed Court of Appeals for reweighing evidence; appellate courts must not substitute judgment for compensation court absent clear error |
Key Cases Cited
- Nichols v. Fairway Bldg. Prods., 294 Neb. 657 (standard for appellate review of Workers’ Compensation Court decisions)
- Hynes v. Good Samaritan Hosp., 291 Neb. 757 (expert testimony required when injury not plainly apparent)
- Owen v. American Hydraulics, 258 Neb. 881 (trier of fact not bound to accept expert opinion)
- Hamer v. Henry, 215 Neb. 805 (role of trier of fact in evaluating expert testimony)
- Mathes v. City of Omaha, 254 Neb. 269 (definition of competent evidence)
- Hohnstein v. W.C. Frank, 237 Neb. 974 (when expert knowledge is required)
- State v. Earl, 252 Neb. 127 (trial court’s initial role in witness competency)
- Hull v. Aetna Ins. Co., 247 Neb. 713 (appellate deference to Workers’ Compensation Court factfindings)