Opinion ID: 1866763
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: basis of disability pension

Text: In its second assignment of error, the board of trustees contends that the district court erred in finding that there was not sufficient relevant evidence to support its decision to base the disability pension on Campbell's T6 injury. Campbell requested a pension based on disability for Hypertension, Neck Disorder, Right Shoulder Disorder, and T-6 Compression Fracture. According to the transcript of the August 15, 2002, meeting, the board of trustees awarded Campbell a service-connected disability for T6. The district court found that the board of trustees erred in not awarding the disability pension based also on various physical conditions [Campbell] incurred while in the course of duty after February 20, 1993. The basis of the disability pension is significant because § 22-78 provides that the disabled member will be paid, in addition to the disability pension, for medically necessary covered services which may be incurred as a result of the injury forming the basis of the disability pension. The board of trustees argues in its brief that there is sufficient relevant evidence in the record to support its award of the disability pension based solely on the 1993 injury. Notably, however, the record clearly reveals that the disability pension was not based on the 1993 injury, but, rather, on only the T6 injury which Campbell sustained in the 1993 motor vehicle accident. It appears that the board of trustees simply ignored substantial evidence in the record that Campbell suffered other service-related injuries in that accident and afterward. The board of trustees relies heavily upon a June 10, 2002, DISABILITY EVALUATION REPORT submitted by Dr. Dean K. Wampler. However, in doing so, the board of trustees appears to mischaracterize the findings in this report. A review of the report reveals that Wampler found nine Diagnoses for Campbell: 1. Chronic Cervical Pain (connected to 1993 work injury). 2. Chronic Headaches (connected to 1993 work injury). 3. Interscapular Thoracic Pain (caused by T6 compression deformity in 1993 injury). 4. Right Shoulder Impingement and AC Joint Arthritis (alleged due to work injury of 2/00). 5. Bilateral Upper Extremity Paresthesia (cause unknown). 6. Past History of Lumbar Strain (cause not evaluated). 7. Hypertension (cause alleged to work related stresses). 8. Situational Anxiety and Single Panic Attack (alleged to work-related stresses). 9. Cervical Degenerative Spine Disease (condition of life). In his Treatment Suggestions following his diagnoses, Wampler noted that Campbell remained symptomatic for all of his conditions. In stating his prognosis, Wampler concluded that Campbell's neck and upper back symptoms would remain largely unchanged over time and that it was unknown whether his high blood pressure could be controlled adequately. Finally, in assessing Campbell's Work Abilities, Wampler concluded: Mr. Campbell has conditions that make him medically unsuitable for many duties of an Omaha Police Officer. Limitations resulting from his medical conditions include restriction from potentially combative suspects through arrests or interrogation. More importantly, his perceived level of stress and its aggravation to his high blood pressure will be a problem in many circumstances, including office work. Wampler stated that Campbell's hypertension requires continuous medication treatment. Taken as a whole, Wampler's report does not constitute sufficient relevant evidence to support the board of trustees' decision to limit the basis of Campbell's disability to only the T6 compression fracture sustained in 1993. Notably, Wampler diagnosed Campbell with injuries related to the 1993 accident other than the T6 injury, as well as other injuries related to subsequent events. Additional evidence in the record further documents those injuries and the fact that they are service related. Moreover, Wampler's report puts significant weight upon the disabling effects of Campbell's hypertension, which is attributed by Wampler to general work stresses and is not specific to either the 1993 accident or the T6 compression fracture. Wampler's report, therefore, does not support the board of trustees' position. Rather, it establishes that Campbell's inability to continue work as a police officer, and thus his disability, is based on various conditions, including those arising from the 1993 accident and his subsequent service-related injuries and conditions. For these reasons, the district court correctly reversed the board of trustees' award of a disability based solely on the T6 injury.