Appeal of Hartranft

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that because medical testimony showed that the claimant’s neuroma does not normally follow the claimant’s specific injury, the claimant is entitled to disability benefits notwithstanding the compensability of the specific loss to the claimant’s hand
• allowing compensation for disability from rare neuroma pain resulting from finger amputation
• allowing compensation for disability from rare neuroma pain resulting from finger amputation
• medical evidence established only 1% of finger amputees suffer neuroma-type pain in the remaining hand; claimant entitled to total disability benefits for hand as well as specific loss benefits for amputated finger
• doctor’s testimony that only one percent of his amputee-patients suffer disabling neuroma pain is sufficient to support a finding that the disability does not normally result from the permanent injury

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).