Title: City of Henderson v. Wolfgram
Citation: 137 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 79
Docket Number: 
State: Nevada
Issuer: Nevada Supreme Court
Date: December 23, 2021

City of Henderson v. Wolfgram Annotate this Case Justia Opinion Summary The Supreme Court affirmed the order of the district court and appeals officer that Employee was incapacitated from earning "full wages" and therefore denying Employer and its insurer's petition for judicial review, holding that there was no error. At issue was whether Employee's inability to earn overtime due to his industrial injury amounted to being incapacitated from earning "full wages" such that he could seek to reopen his claim more than one year after its closing. The appeals officer concluded (1) Employee was incapacitated from earning full wages for the time specified under Nev. Rev. Stat. 616C.400(1); (2) that Employee had satisfied the statute's period of incapacitation; and (3) therefore, Nev. Rev. Stat. 616C.390(5) permitted Employee to submit an application to reopen his claim more than one year after it had closed. The district court affirmed. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the term "full wages" as used in section 616C.400(1) may include payments for overtime; and (2) substantial evidence supported the appeals officer's findings in this case. Read more Want to stay in the know about new opinions from the Supreme Court of Nevada? Sign up for free summaries delivered directly to your inbox. Learn More › You already receive new opinion summaries from Supreme Court of Nevada. Did you know we offer summary newsletters for even more practice areas and jurisdictions? Explore them here . Opinion Annotation Download PDF Primary Holding The Supreme Court affirmed the orders of the district court and appeals officer denying Employer and its insurer's petition for judicial review, holding that there was no error. Disclaimer: Justia Annotations is a forum for attorneys to summarize, comment on, and analyze case law published on our site. Justia makes no guarantees or warranties that the annotations are accurate or reflect the current state of law, and no annotation is intended to be, nor should it be construed as, legal advice. Contacting Justia or any attorney through this site, via web form, email, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship. City of Henderson v. Wolfgram Primary Holding The Supreme Court affirmed the orders of the district court and appeals officer denying Employer and... Read the full annotations for this case. Webinars You Might Like: Please visit individual webinar pages for more information about CLE accreditation.