Lewis v. MBC Constr. Co.

L

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/ 07/16/2021 08:09 AM CDT – 726 – Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 309 Nebraska Reports LEWIS v. MBC CONSTR. CO. Cite as 309 Neb. 726 Allen Michael Lewis, appellee and cross-appellant, v. MBC Construction Co., Inc., and Carolina Casualty Ins. Co., appellants and cross-appellees. ___ N.W.2d ___ Filed July 16, 2021. No. S-20-728. 1. Workers’ Compensation: Appeal and Error. Under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-185 (Cum. Supp. 2020), a judgment, order, or award of the com- pensation 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. 2. ____: ____. On appellate review, the factual findings made by the trial judge of the Workers’ Compensation Court have the effect of a jury ver- dict and will not be disturbed unless clearly wrong. Appeal from the Workers’ Compensation Court: Julie A. Martin, Judge. Vacated and remanded with directions. Daniel P. Lenaghan and Christine E. Westberg Dorn, of Sodoro, Mooney & Lenaghan, L.L.C., for appellants. Justin High and Erin N. Fox, of High & Younes, L.L.C., for appellee. Heavican, C.J., Miller-Lerman, Cassel, Stacy, Funke, Papik, and Freudenberg, JJ. – 727 – Nebraska Supreme Court Advance Sheets 309 Nebraska Reports LEWIS v. MBC CONSTR. CO. Cite as 309 Neb. 726 Per Curiam. NATURE OF CASE Allen Michael Lewis was injured in the course of his employment with MBC Construction Co., which injury ulti- mately resulted in the amputation of his left leg. This case arises from Lewis’ request for MBC Construction Co. and Carolina Casualty Ins. Co. (collectively MBC) to build acces- sible housing for him. The compensation court rejected Lewis’ proposal for a four-bedroom, three-garage accessible house, but found certain accessibility features reasonable, necessary, and required due to the nature of Lewis’ injury. It ordered MBC to modify an existing home or potentially build a unit to meet Lewis’ accessibility requirements. MBC appeals, and Lewis cross-appeals. Because of ambiguity in its order, we conclude that the compensation court’s order did not provide a meaningful basis for appellate review of its order regarding alternative accessible housing, and accordingly, we vacate the order and remand the cause with directions to enter an order in compliance with Workers’ Comp. Ct. R. of Proc. 11 (2021). In view of our disposition of the appeal, we do not consider Lewis’ cross-appeal. STATEMENT OF FACTS On May 1, 2015, while Lewis was working for MBC Construction Co., an autopaving machine rolled on Lewis and crushed his leg. The leg was ultimately amputated above the knee. Neither party disputes that the amputation was a conse- quence of Lewis’ original injury. Lewis now uses a wheelchair, scooter, and crutches. One of Lewis’ …

Original document

Add comment

By

Recent Posts

Recent Comments