Bodfield v. Wal Mart, 082707 NEWC, 2056

• Case Date: August 27, 2007
• Court: Nebraska

GERALD BODFIELD, Plaintiff, v. WAL MART, Defendant. No. 2056 DOC 205 Nebraska Workers Compensation August 27, 2007           Jamie Gaylene Scholz, Attorney at Law           Brenda S. Spilker, Attorney at Law           ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE IN PART AND REMAND IN PART ON REVIEW          This matter came on for a review hearing before the Nebraska Workers' Compensation Court at Lincoln, Lancaster County, Nebraska, on August 14, 2007, upon the Application for Review of the plaintiff filed February 20, 2007, alleging error in the Award entered on February 15, 2007, by Judge Laureen Van Norman and the briefs and arguments of the parties.          I.          The plaintiff alleges as error the trial court’s failure to award certain medical expenses and various periods of temporary total disability.          The review panel notes the specific alleged error of the nonpayment of medical expenses of Central Nebraska Orthopedics and Memorial Health Clinic in Exhibit 10. A review of the Central Nebraska Orthopedics’ bill shows that it appears to be the office of orthopedic surgeon Dr. Gerald McCarty. In the award, the trial court specifically found that the plaintiff was entitled to the medical expenses incurred with treatment by Dr. McCarty. The Memorial Health Clinic billing is for various treatment dates during the late fall of 2005. This may be during the period of time that the plaintiff sought further medical treatment with a doctor different than Dr. McCarty which was not allowed by the trial court due to the unauthorized change of physicians. It is uncertain to the review panel whether the billing statement from Central Nebraska Orthopedics which is Dr. McCarty should be paid as well as the Memorial Health Clinic billing statement. The review panel finds that those two bills should be remanded to the trial court for further consideration and decision as to whether they should or should not be paid and if so the amount due.          II.          The review panel further finds that at the time of the review hearing the parties filed a stipulation regarding a billing from Central Nebraska...