Workers' Compensation: Appeal and Error.
A judgment, order, or award of the Workers' Compensation
Court may be modified, reversed, or set aside only upon the
grounds that (1) the compensation court acted without or in
excess of its powers; (2) the judgment, order, or award was
procured by fraud; (3) there is not sufficient competent
evidence in the record to warrant the making of the order,
judgment, or award; or (4) the findings of fact by the
compensation court do not support the order or award.
Judgments: Appeal and Error. An appellate
court independently reviews questions of law decided by a
Jurisdiction: Appeal and Error. Before
reaching the legal issues presented for review, it is the
duty of an appellate court to determine whether it has
jurisdiction over the matter before it.
Jurisdiction: Final Orders: Appeal and
Error. For an appellate court to acquire
jurisdiction of an appeal, there must be a final order
entered by the court from which the appeal is taken;
conversely, an appellate court is without jurisdiction to
entertain appeals from non-final orders.
Jurisdiction: Appeal and Error. When an
appellate court is without jurisdiction to act, the appeal
must be dismissed.
Final Orders: Appeal and Error. Generally,
when multiple issues are presented to a trial court for
simultaneous disposition in the same proceeding and the court
decides some of the issues, while expressly reserving some
issue or issues for later determination, the court's
determination of less than all the issues is an interlocutory
order and is not a final order for the purpose of an appeal.
Statutes: Courts. When interpreting a
statute, a court will first consider the plain language.
Neb.App. 15] 8. Statutes:
Legislature: Intent. In discerning the meaning of a
statute, a court must determine and give effect to the
purpose and intent of the Legislature as ascertained from the
entire language of the statute considered in its plain,
ordinary, and popular sense, as it is the court's duty to
discover, if possible, the Legislature's intent from the
language of the statute itself.
Workers' Compensation. Under the
Nebraska Workers' Compensation Act, it has long been the
policy to construe the statute liberally so that its
beneficent purposes may not be thwarted by technical
refinements of interpretation.
. The obvious purpose of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-120 (Cum.
Supp. 2016) is to authorize the compensation court to order
an employer to pay the costs of the medicines and medical
treatment reasonably necessary to relieve the worker from the
effects of the injury.
. An order modifying an award to exclude a specific surgery
does not foreclose an employee from establishing at a later
date that the surgery is reasonably necessary to treat his or
her compensable injury and is therefore encompassed under the
terms of the award.
. The general rule under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-120 (Cum.
Supp. 2016) is that, should a court determine a medical
treatment for a condition unrelated to a work-related injury
is medically reasonable and necessary to treat the underlying
work-related injury, the medical treatment is required by the
nature of the injury and is compensable.
from the Workers' Compensation Court: J. Michael
Fitzgerald, Judge. Reversed and remanded for further
C. Holsten and Brynne Holsten Puhl, of Atwood. Holsten,
Brown, Deaver & Spier Law Firm, P.C., L.L.O., for
W. Iliff and Adam J. Wachal, of Gross & Welch, P.C.,
L.L.O., for appellee.
Chief Judge, and Inbody and Bishop, Judges.
Carr appeals the Nebraska Workers' Compensation
Court's denial of his motion to compel Gordon Ganz, doing
[26 Neb.App. 16] business as G & H Farms, to pay for
Carr's coronary artery bypass procedure. Specifically,
Carr appeals the compensation court's orders on December
23 and 30, 2016, and January 19, 2017. Because we conclude
the December 30, 2016, order modified the December 23 order
to reserve disposition of some of the issues, the December 23
order was not final and appealable until the January 19,
2017, order. Thus, we find Carr's February 7 notice of
appeal was timely filed and we have jurisdiction to consider
the appeal. For the reasons set forth below, we reverse the
compensation court's order pertaining to the
compensability of Carr's coronary artery bypass procedure
and remand the cause for further proceedings.
January 2012, while employed by Ganz, Carr was "bucked
off" a horse and injured in the course of his
employment. Specifically, Carr received the following
injuries due to the accident: symphysis pubis and sacral
fractures, hernia, urinary incontinence, and erectile
dysfunction. Following a petition filed with the Nebraska
Workers' Compensation Court, the parties entered into a
stipulation in April 2014, and the court entered an award
pursuant to this stipulation wherein Carr was awarded
temporary total disability benefits to be paid by Ganz until
Carr reached maximum medical improvement for his ...