 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Brady Memorial Home v. Hantke6/23/1999
or the microdiscetomy. He also indicated that disc herniation was not evident on the MRI films he viewed prior to his examination of Hantke, and that no relationship existed between the March 21 incident at work and the May 10, 1997 incident at Hantke's home. He further testified that, according to the surgeon's reports, the disc material that was surgically removed from Hantke's back was calcified and hard, indicating the material was of a long-standing duration of approximately five to ten years.
[ ] Hantke claims that the deposition testimony of Dr. Christensen and Dr. Durward supports her claim that her employment at Brady Home was a major contributing cause of her injury . However, after reviewing the doctors' deposition testimony and the evidence, we disagree. We recognize that Hantke's "' roof need not arise to a degree of absolute certainty; [however], an award may not be based upon mere possibility or speculative evidence.'" Kester v. Colonial Manor, 1997 SD 127, § 24, 571 NW2d 376, 381 (quoting Hanten v. Palace Builders, Inc., 1997 SD 3, § 15, 558 NW2d 76, 80 (citation omitted)).
[ ] The evidence here establishes, at best, a possibility. Only Dr. Dowdle provided an unequivocal opinion of whether Hantke's employment was a major contributing cause of her condition; he stated that it was not. In addition, Dr. Christensen and Dr. Durward based their diagnoses and opinions on the belief that Hantke had suffered no previous injuries or problems. See Hanten, 1997 SD 3, § 10, 558 NW2d at 78 (stating "expert testimony is entitled to no more weight than the facts upon which it is predicated"). Therefore, their opinions provide nothing more than speculative evidence, which is inadequate to meet Hantke's burden. Accordingly, we find no error in Department's decision and conclude that the trial court erred in reversing it.
[ ] We reverse and remand to the circuit court with directions that it enter an order consistent with this decision.
[ ] AMUNDSON, KONENKAMP and GILBERTSON, Justices, concur.
[ ] SABERS, Justice, deeming himself disqualified, did not participate.
Page 1 2 3 South Dakota Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|