Court Opinion

ID: 9741184
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:51:03.881425+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:22.744750
License: Public Domain

Gerrard, L,
concurring.
Because there was no evidence of a substantial increase in Snipes’ disability, I agree that Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-137 (Reissue 1993) bars recovery of this particular $500 claim by Snipes. However, in a case such as this, where there is no dispute about the compensable nature of the injury and the employer has vol*424untarily paid compensation to the injured worker, the right to receive additional compensation in the event of a material increase in disability resulting from the injury is available in the future. See White v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 230 Neb. 369, 431 N.W.2d 641 (1988).
Thus, while § 48-137 barred Snipes’ claim based on the evidence before us, the courthouse door is not necessarily forever locked in the event of a material increase in disability resulting from the February 2, 1984, injury.
White, C.J., and Fahrnbruch, J., join in this concurrence.