 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Blodgett-McDeavitt v. University of Nebraska12/7/2004
ssibly could experience the same -- the same problem that [Blodgett-McDeavitt] did." Elliott stated that they installed the additional ground wire " ust to make sure there's . . . something in place in the event that [they] missed something that [they] couldn't think to test."
John Harper, a master electrician and the manager of electrical services with the University, testified that he examined the area where Blodgett-McDeavitt claimed she had received a shock by alternating current. Harper testified that Blodgett-McDeavitt could not have been shocked in the manner she claimed, because the necessary elements to receive such a shock were not in place, that is, potential voltage, continuity, and grounding. However, Harper admitted that he had not been on the site in September 1997, that the first time he had been on the site was not until September 2000, and that he did not conduct any testing on the cubicle until April 2002. Harper also admitted that he did not know the exact condition of the cubicle or panel in September 1997 and that he did not know exactly where Blodgett-McDeavitt had been standing at the time she was allegedly shocked or exactly where she was touching the cubicle.
In light of all of the above-mentioned testimony, and in consideration of our standard of review, we cannot find that the trial court was clearly wrong in determining that Blodgett-McDeavitt suffered a work-related injury by an electric shock on September 11, 1997. Accordingly, we affirm the findings of the trial court.
(b) Causation
The University also challenges the sufficiency of Blodgett-McDeavitt's proof of medical causation. Despite an abundance of evidence that Blodgett-McDeavitt's symptoms were not consistent with the injury she reported and that Blodgett-McDeavitt did not suffer any brain injury, Blodgett-McDeavitt did present some medical evidence that she had suffered injuries resulting from an electrical current accident such that the trial court could have made the findings it did. After the alleged accident, Blodgett-McDeavitt first sought medical attention from a chiropractor, who diagnosed Blodgett-McDeavitt as having suffered an " ccident caused by electric current," based on "[Blodgett-McDeavitt's] subjective complaints and [the chiropractor's] objective findings." The chiropractor also noted that Blodgett-McDeavitt had "problems with daily function involving her personal and work environments with several symptoms of electrical trauma."
Approximately a year after the alleged accident, Blodgett-McDeavitt was examined by an ophthalmologist, who stated that his "impression" was that Blodgett-McDeavitt suffered " raumatic brain injury due to electrocution and visual agnosia." One day after consulting with the opthalmologist, Blodgett-McDeavitt was evaluated by an otology and neurology specialist, who stated that Blodgett-McDeavitt "present with a history of a traumatic electrical brain injury" and that he "believe . . . Blodgett-McDeavitt did suffer a traumatic brain injury from electrocution."
Blodgett-McDeavitt was examined 2 years after the alleged accident by another neurologist, Dr. Marc Hines, who stated that "[Blodgett-McDeavitt] appears to have had an electric shock injury." Although Hines stated that "[Blodgett-McDeavitt's] neurologic examination revealed that she had many trigger points typical of fibromyalgia, otherwise, her neurologic examination appeared to be relatively normal," Hines also stated that "[Blodgett-McDeavitt's] neuropsychological testing show that she has significant cognitive deficits secondary to an electrical shock injury and brain damage from this." Hines opined that "the electric shock injury is the direct eti
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Nebraska Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|