Opinion ID: 1835416
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: recovery against second injury fund

Text: To recover from the Second Injury Fund, § 48-128, a claimant must prove by a preponderance of evidence (1) a prior permanent partial disability, (2) a second or subsequent injury which is compensable, causing permanent disability, and (3) the combination of permanent disabilities existing after such second or subsequent injury is substantially greater in degree or percentage than permanent disability from the second or subsequent injury, considered by itself and not in conjunction with the prior permanent disability. Norris v. Iowa Beef Processors, 224 Neb. 867, 875-76, 402 N.W.2d 658, 665-66 (1987). For the combination of permanent disabilities necessary to sustain a claim against the Second Injury Fund, the prior permanent partial disability or disabilities must interact with the effects of the second or subsequent compensable injury and enhance the permanent disability that otherwise results from the later compensable injury alone.... As expressed in 2 A. Larson, The Law of Workmen's Compensation § 59.32(g) at 10-477 (1986): Although the prior impairment need not combine with the compensable injury in any special way, it must add something to the disability before the Special Fund [Second Injury Fund] can become liable. In other words, it is not enough to show that the claimant had some kind of handicap, if that handicap contributed nothing to the final disability. Norris, supra at 880-81, 402 N.W.2d at 668-69. Therefore, the main issue in the present appeal is whether, as a factual matter, Sherard's disability before her 1986 accident at Bethphage, when combined with her disability from the 1986 accident, resulted in disability substantially greater in degree or percentage than would have resulted from Sherard's 1986 Bethphage injury, considered alone. Disability, in the context of § 48-128, means an employee's diminution of employability or impairment of earning power or capacity. Norris, supra . Cf. Heiliger v. Walters & Heiliger Electric, Inc., 236 Neb. 459, 461 N.W.2d 565 (1990) (employee's total or permanent partial disability as a basis for compensation under Neb.Rev.Stat. § 48-121 (Reissue 1988), except disability from schedule injuries described in § 48-121(3)). Whether a combination of permanent disabilities, within the purview of § 48-128, is substantially greater than permanent disability from a second or subsequent compensable injury is a question of fact. Norris, supra, 224 Neb. at 876, 402 N.W.2d at 666. Kincaid, the rehabilitation specialist, estimated Sherard's permanent loss of earning capacity at 80 percent in February 1984, with an additional 15-percent loss of earning capacity after Sherard's 1986 accident. Simple arithmetic evidences a 95-percent loss of earning capacity, or, in all practicality, a total loss of earning capacity, from Sherard's combined disabilities, with 15 percent of the loss attributable to the 1986 accident, considered alone. With Kincaid's assessment of Sherard's loss of earning capacity, before and after Sherard's injury at Bethphage, the opinions from Kincaid and Dr. Matthews supplied a basis for the conclusion that Sherard's loss of earning capacity before 1986, combined with her additional loss of earning capacity from the January 1986 accident, was greater than the loss which would have resulted from the January 1986 accident, considered alone. Under the standard of review for this court, we cannot conclude that the Nebraska Workers' Compensation Court, as the sole judge of witness credibility and weight to be given a witness' testimony, was clearly erroneous in its finding that the Fund is liable for Sherard's compensation benefits payable pursuant to § 48-128.