Scott v. Drivers Mgmt., A-16-393

On March 20, 2010, Scott injured herself stepping down from an upper bunk in a truck; she claimed injuries to her right knee, lower back, hips, groin, ankle, and foot.
Medical history showed long‑standing low back complaints dating to around 1990 and intermittent lower‑extremity complaints before 2010; multiple MRIs showed only mild degenerative changes.
Post‑accident care included conservative treatment, epidural injections, and arthroscopic right knee surgery (partial medial meniscectomy) in March 2011.
The Nebraska Workers’ Compensation Court awarded temporary benefits through January 10, 2012, a 2% loss of use rating for the right leg (4.3 weeks), ordered payment of medical bills through MMI, but denied future medical care and vocational rehabilitation.
The compensation court credited Dr. Michael O’Neil’s review (who concluded Scott reached MMI as of Dr. Knox’s January 10, 2012 exam and had no permanent back impairment causally related to the 2010 accident) over other medical evidence.
Scott appealed only the MMI determination for her lumbar spine; she proceeded pro se and did not include the required assignments of error, so the appellate court reviewed for plain error.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Scott had reached maximum medical improvement (MMI) for injuries from the March 20, 2010 accident	Scott contends she continued to receive treatment and various post‑2012 records show she was not at MMI	Drivers Management/compensation court relied on Dr. O’Neil and Dr. Knox: longstanding preexisting back problems, no objective findings attributable to 2010 injury, and no causal link for post‑Jan‑2012 treatment	Affirmed: court found MMI as of Jan 10, 2012; no plain error. Appellate court deferred to workers’ comp court’s credibility determinations and choice of medical evidence

Stacy v. Great Lakes Agri Mktg., 276 Neb. 236 (MMI defined as recovery from all injuries of a compensable accident)
Caradori v. Frontier Airlines, Inc., 213 Neb. 513 (appellate deference to trial court findings of fact)
Hynes v. Good Samaritan Hosp., 291 Neb. 757 (Workers’ Compensation Court is sole judge of witness credibility)
Pearson v. Archer-Daniels-Midland Milling Co., 285 Neb. 568 (sufficiency of evidence tested in favor of successful party)
Kerkman v. Weidner Williams Roofing Co., 250 Neb. 70 (appellate court will not substitute judgment where medical reports conflict)
Cummings v. Omaha Public Schools, 6 Neb. App. 478 (Workers’ Compensation Court not bound by medical expert opinions)
Steffy v. Steffy, 287 Neb. 529 (plain‑error standard explained)
Mix v. City of Lincoln, 244 Neb. 561 (pro se litigants must follow appellate rules)
In re Interest of Samantha L. & Jasmine L., 286 Neb. 778 (consequences of failing to comply with briefing rules)