Jurgenson v. International Paper Co.
A-16-1069
| Neb. Ct. App. | Aug 1, 2017Background
- In May 2008, Chauntelle Jurgenson, an assistant machine operator for International Paper Company (IPC), sustained a right foot injury when an 80–100 lb die board with knives penetrated her steel-toed boot. She continued working that day and reported the injury the next day.
- Initial treatment included wrap and light duty; pain persisted. Over 2008–2009 she underwent two foot surgeries and was diagnosed with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) of the right lower extremity; multiple pain-management treatments followed.
- In June 2010 Dr. O’Neil found maximum medical improvement with a 25% right lower extremity impairment (10% whole‑body conversion) and restrictions against prolonged standing/walking.
- In late 2014–2015 Jurgenson received a spinal cord stimulator (trial leads in Nov. 2014; permanent implant Dec. 2014). Post‑implant physicians (Dr. Evans and Dr. Gammel) imposed restrictions affecting the torso/upper body (e.g., avoid repetitive overhead arm extension, vigorous spinal flexion) to prevent lead migration.
- A vocational analyst produced alternative loss-of-earning-capacity opinions (50% based on Drs. Evans/Gammel; 100% based on Dr. Mantler’s two‑hour workday opinion). The Workers’ Compensation Court awarded 93 5/7 weeks temporary total disability and 206 2/7 weeks permanent partial disability for a 50% loss of earning capacity, finding a body-as-a-whole injury.
- IPC appealed, arguing (1) injury was limited to the scheduled member (right lower extremity), (2) the 50% loss of earning capacity and temporary classification were unsupported, and (3) the WC court’s decision lacked Rule 11(A) specificity. The Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether injury is to body as a whole or to a scheduled member | Jurgenson: spinal cord stimulator and resulting whole‑body restrictions produced a body‑as‑a‑whole injury | IPC: medical opinions show impairment only to the right lower extremity; whole‑body ratings were mere conversions | Court: affirmed body‑as‑a‑whole finding based on credible restrictions from Dr. Evans (and Dr. Gammel) affecting torso/upper body, not clearly erroneous |
| Whether 50% loss of earning capacity (6/25/2010–9/29/2014) is supported | Jurgenson: ongoing pain/limitations and physicians’ opinions (e.g., Dr. Mantler) + vocational analysis support 50% loss | IPC: no physician found 50% loss during that period; restrictions producing 50% began only after stimulator | Court: factual finding of 50% loss supported by testimony, exam results, and expert opinions; upheld |
| Whether classifying benefits as temporary partial after MMI (June 24, 2010) was reversible error | Jurgenson: parties stipulated wages; benefit calculation unaffected | IPC: post‑MMI benefits should be permanent, not temporary | Court: statutory formula treats partial benefits same for calculation; parties stipulated wage; even if label wrong, not reversible error |
| Whether WC court violated Rule 11(A) by insufficiently stating basis for decision | Jurgenson: court sufficiently discussed physicians, FCE, vocational reports, and testimony | IPC: order failed to specify evidence and omitted ordering of certain temporary benefits | Court: court specified evidence relied upon and its award of 206 2/7 weeks encompassed partial benefits; no Rule 11(A) violation |
Key Cases Cited
- Moyera v. Quality Pork International, 284 Neb. 963, 825 N.W.2d 409 (discusses when injury to scheduled member versus body as a whole applies)
- Tchikobava v. Albatross Express, 293 Neb. 223, 876 N.W.2d 610 (appellate standard for Workers’ Compensation Court factual findings)
- Stacy v. Great Lake Agri Marketing, Inc., 276 Neb. 236, 753 N.W.2d 785 (issue of permanent impairment and loss of earning power is a factual question for the WC court)
- Risor v. Nebraska Boiler, 277 Neb. 679, 765 N.W.2d 170 (deference to WC court credibility determinations)
- Gardner v. International Paper Destruction & Recycling, 291 Neb. 415, 865 N.W.2d 371 (factual determinations by WC court treated like jury verdict)
- Underwood v. Eilers Mach. & Welding, 6 Neb. App. 631, 575 N.W.2d 878 (loss of earning power is a question of fact)
- Frauendorfer v. Lindsay Mfg. Co., 263 Neb. 237, 639 N.W.2d 125 (disability for compensation measured by diminution of employability, not solely medical impairment)
- Green v. Drivers Management, Inc., 263 Neb. 197, 639 N.W.2d 94 (expert opinion requirement where claimed injury is subjective)