From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

ZANY BRAINY v. HEALY

Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle County
May 3, 2000
C.A. No. 99A-08-012 WCC (Del. Super. Ct. May. 3, 2000)

Opinion

C.A. No. 99A-08-012 WCC.

Submitted: January 11, 2000.

Decided: May 3, 2000.

Motion to Affirm from Decision of Industrial Accident Board — DENIED

H. Garrett Baker, Esquire; 1201 N. Market Street, Suite 1401, P.O. Box 1630, Wilmington, DE 19890-1630. Attorney for Employer-Appellant.

William W. Erhart, Esquire; 300 Delaware Avenue, Suite 1130, P.O. Box 234, Wilmington, DE 19899-0234. Attorney for Employee-Appellee.


ORDER


This 3rd day of May, 2000, after considering Nancy Healy's ("Employee") motion to affirm the Industrial Accident Board's (the "Board") decision, it appears that:

1. Employee was a key punch operator and receptionist for Zany Brainy ("Employer") for several years. On December 21, 1998, Employee complained of left arm pain. Ultimately, aneurysms were revealed in both upper extremities, and she was diagnosed with thoracic outlet syndrome. Employee had surgery on her left and right upper extremities in March and May 1999. Thereafter, she sought compensation for total disability benefits.

2. The Board held a hearing on July 13, 1999. It was undisputed that Employee's thoracic outlet syndrome in the left upper extremity and subsequent surgery were work-related. The dispute centered on whether her thoracic outlet syndrome in the right upper extremity and subsequent surgery resulted from her work duties. The Board found that Employee's injuries to both sides were work-related and that Employee was entitled to total disability benefits from December 28, 1998 to July 7, 1999. Employer appealed the Board's decision.

3. As a result, Employee moves to affirm the Board's decision under Superior Court Civil Rule 72.1, arguing that there is clearly substantial evidence to support the Board's findings. The Court believes full briefing is warranted to determine whether there is substantial evidence that the injuries sustained on Employee's right side were work-related despite the absence of symptoms until several months after she ceased working for Employer. As such, Employee's motion to affirm is DENIED. Employee's answering brief is due 20 days from the date of this Order and Employer's reply brief is due 10 days thereafter.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

ZANY BRAINY v. HEALY

Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle County
May 3, 2000
C.A. No. 99A-08-012 WCC (Del. Super. Ct. May. 3, 2000)
Case details for

ZANY BRAINY v. HEALY

Case Details

Full title:ZANY BRAINY, Employer-Appellant v. NANCY HEALY, Employee-Appellee

Court:Superior Court of Delaware, New Castle County

Date published: May 3, 2000

Citations

C.A. No. 99A-08-012 WCC (Del. Super. Ct. May. 3, 2000)