Gunter v. Fischer Scientific American

475 A.2d 671, 193 N. J. Super. 688 (1984)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Gunter v. Fischer Scientific American

New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
475 A.2d 671, 193 N. J. Super. 688 (1984)

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…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 735,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 735,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 735,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership