Nebraska Supreme Court Denies Death Benefits in Workplace Fall, Cancer Treatment Case

Why It Matters

Employers and insurers must ensure medical evidence meets Nebraska’s strict causation standard, limiting liability for death benefits tied to pre‑existing conditions. The ruling also leaves the legal viability of lost‑treatment claims unresolved, prompting future litigation.

Key Takeaways

• Nebraska requires definitive expert causation for death‑benefit claims
• Hedging medical opinions fail to meet “reasonable degree of certainty.”
• Lost‑treatment theory remains untested; future cases may differ
• Employers can still recover temporary disability and expense reimbursements

Pulse Analysis

Nebraska’s workers’ compensation system has long required claimants to prove a direct causal link between a workplace injury and any subsequent death. The recent Supreme Court decision underscores that the burden rests on expert testimony that meets a “reasonable degree of medical certainty.” Vague language such as “could” or “may” is insufficient, even when the medical narrative appears plausible. This heightened standard reflects a broader trend in state courts to tighten evidentiary thresholds, protecting employers from expansive liability when pre‑existing illnesses are involved.

For HR and risk professionals, the ruling offers a clear procedural roadmap. Medical experts must provide quantitative, unambiguous assessments—such as specific survival models—without hedging. In the Hastreiter case, the plaintiff’s experts offered conditional statements, while the employer’s expert presented numbers but still stopped short of definitive causation. Consequently, the court affirmed the denial of death benefits, though it awarded temporary total disability and related expenses tied directly to the hip injury. This outcome reinforces the importance of meticulous documentation and early engagement with qualified medical consultants to shape a defensible claim strategy.

Looking ahead, the court deliberately left the broader “lost‑treatment” theory—arguing that a work injury delayed life‑extending care—open for future adjudication. Companies should anticipate renewed litigation as claimants refine their expert testimony to meet Nebraska’s strict standards. Proactive measures include training claims adjusters on causation requirements, maintaining detailed medical records, and conducting pre‑claim medical reviews. By aligning claim handling with the court’s clarified evidentiary expectations, employers can mitigate exposure while ensuring legitimate injury benefits are appropriately awarded.