 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Widtfeldt v. Eaton Corp.12/23/2003
(not designated for permanent publication)
I. INTRODUCTION
Eaton Corporation, doing business as Vickers (Vickers), appeals from an order of the Nebraska Workers' Compensation Court review panel affirming in part and remanding in part the trial court's decision. Vickers contends that the review panel erred in remanding to the trial court the issue of whether Vickers was entitled to a credit against benefits for compensation paid to Raymond L. Widtfeldt by way of a severance package. Vickers also challenges the review panel's failure to reverse various other findings concerning Widtfeldt's loss of earning capacity and the awards of vocational rehabilitation, future medical expenses, and reimbursement for mileage expenses. We find that the record presented does not support a basis for affording Vickers a credit against benefits to offset the severance package paid to Widtfeldt, and we reverse the review panel's decision that the issue should be remanded to the trial court. We otherwise affirm the review panel's order.
II. BACKGROUND
Widtfeldt was born on December 4, 1950. He began working for Vickers immediately after graduating from high school and continued working for them on a full-time basis for 32 years. Widtfeldt was employed by Vickers as a machine operator, running a "lapping machine," which required a significant amount of stooping, bending, twisting, and loading of materials into the machine. Widtfeldt testified that he was required to lift anywhere from 15 to 50 pounds at a time when loading the machine.
On February 1, 2000, Widtfeldt suffered a back injury at work. There is no dispute between the parties that the back injury was a compensable work-related injury. After the injury, Widtfeldt returned to work and was assigned a "helper" who did most of the heavier work and lifting for him. Widtfeldt testified that he would not have been able to continue doing his normal work responsibilities without the assistance of the helper.
On August 28, 2000, Widtfeldt suffered an injury to his left shoulder at work. There is likewise no dispute between the parties that the left shoulder injury was a compensable work-related injury. On November 1, Widtfeldt had surgery performed on that shoulder. Widtfeldt never returned to work for Vickers because the plant closed in January 2001.
Widtfeldt testified that he continues to have problems and pain associated with both his back and his shoulder. After the Vickers plant closed, he enrolled in classes at Vatterott College to study in the heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) program. Widtfeldt testified that although he realizes his lifting restrictions may cause problems with gaining employment in the HVAC field, he is hopeful that with his new training, he may be able to do some of the tasks, teach, or work at a parts store.
On September 3, 2002, Widtfeldt filed an amended petition. He alleged that he suffered work-related injuries to his back and shoulder, as set forth above. He also alleged that the issues between the parties were the " ature and extent of permanent disability," with respect to each injury, and his "entitlement to mileage reimbursement for travel to and from" medical providers. He further sought adjudication of "the rights and liabilities of the parties on account of" the work-related injuries. Vickers' answer alleged that Widtfeldt had already been indemnified for his work-related injuries, denied that Widtfeldt had any permanent disability, and asserted that Vickers was entitled to "a credit against benefits owed to [Widtfeldt]" for payments made "in lieu of compensation ."
On October 16, 2002, the trial court entered
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Nebraska Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|