Summary
The Nebraska Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' reversal and vacation of an award of waiting-time penalties and attorney fees to Martin Boring under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-125. The court held that the Workers' Compensation Court improperly relied solely on a judicial admission in Zoetis LLC's answer rather than evaluating the evidence presented at trial. Because the evidence supported reasonable but opposite conclusions regarding compensability and the nature and extent of Boring's injury, a reasonable controversy existed.
Holdings
- A judicial admission in a workers' compensation pleading does not establish the absence of a reasonable controversy when the parties subsequently try the issue by stipulation, evidence, and consent; in that circumstance, the admission is superseded or the party is relieved from its effect for purposes of determining the issues actually tried.
- Waiting-time penalties and attorney fees are available in a Workers' Compensation Court proceeding only when there is no reasonable controversy concerning the employee's claim. A reasonable controversy exists when an unanswered legal question must be resolved to determine liability or when properly adduced evidence would support reasonable but opposite conclusions affecting allowance or rejection of the claim.
- The Court of Appeals correctly reversed and vacated the Workers' Compensation Court's award of penalties and attorney fees, although the Nebraska Supreme Court articulated a somewhat different rationale.
Questions Presented
- Whether the Workers' Compensation Court improperly relied on a pleading admission to find that no reasonable controversy existed under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-125.
- Whether the trial stipulation, conduct of the parties, and evidence superseded or relieved Zoetis from the effect of its judicial admission concerning Boring's compensable injury.
- Whether the evidence established a reasonable controversy that precluded waiting-time penalties and attorney fees under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-125.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (14)
- Parks v. Hy-Vee, 307 Neb. 927, 951 N.W.2d 504 (2020)(followed)
- VanKirk v. Central Community College, 285 Neb. 231, 826 N.W.2d 277 (2013)(followed)
- Bronzynski v. Model Electric, 14 Neb. App. 355, 707 N.W.2d 46 (2005)(followed)
- Picard v. P & C Group 1, 306 Neb. 292, 945 N.W.2d 183 (2020)(followed)
- Bower v. Eaton Corp., 301 Neb. 311, 918 N.W.2d 249 (2018)(followed)
- Heesch v. Swimtastic Swim School, 20 Neb. App. 260, 823 N.W.2d 211 (2012)(considered)
- Risor v. Nebraska Boiler, 277 Neb. 679, 765 N.W.2d 170 (2009)(followed)
- Hall v. County of Lancaster, 287 Neb. 969, 846 N.W.2d 107 (2014)(followed)
- Davis v. State, 297 Neb. 955, 902 N.W.2d 165 (2017)(followed)
- Vermaas v. Heckel, 170 Neb. 321, 102 N.W.2d 647 (1960)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 14.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…