Gunter v. Fischer Scientific American
New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
475 A.2d 671, 193 N. J. Super. 688 (1984)
- Written by Whitney Punzone, JD
Facts
Georgia Gunter (plaintiff) suffered back injuries during her employment with Fischer Scientific American (Fischer) (defendant) on two separate occasions. Gunter applied for workers’-compensation benefits, but her claim was denied. Dr. Shaw, who was Gunter’s expert, testified at the hearing as to Gunter’s partial permanent disability and total permanent disability and provided objective medical findings as to Gunter’s injuries. Medical-expert testimony was presented that refuted Dr. Shaw’s claims. Medical records were presented, and testimony was given by various medical witnesses. The judge of compensation (JC) did not allow into evidence medical reports by Dr. Glass, who was Gunter’s treating physician, and the doctor’s-office records, despite the office manager’s testimony. The JC ruled that Dr. Glass himself should have testified. The JC rejected claims for neurological and psychiatric disability. The JC also rejected the claim for orthopedic disability based on the JC’s evaluation of the testimony of Dr. Shaw, specifically stating that there was little evidence of objective findings. Gunter appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Botter, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 821,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 989 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
