Coleman v. KBO, Inc.

Citations

• 2018 Ohio 763

Syllabus

In considering claim for eligibility for workers' compensation on a summary judgment motion, the trial court erred in finding that there was no genuine issue of material fact as to whether claimant's psychological condition in 2015 was caused by a workplace injury several years earlier. Claimant's expert stated by affidavit that, in his opinion, claimant's depression was related to the workplace injury five years earlier. The trial court also erred in concluding, as a matter of law, that reasonable minds could not find a causal connection to the psychological condition five years after the physical injury. The trial court erred in concluding that claimant's expert's opinion could not be considered, because it was \self serving\ and \contradicted\ claimant's admissions about her medical history. Rules related to contradictory evidence offered by a party in support of or in opposition to a motion for summary judgment apply to contradictory statements by the same person no such evidence was offered here. Moreover, the expert's opinion and the claimant's admissions were not contradictory, and a non-party's statements are not \self serving\ when offered to oppose a motion for summary judgment. Judgment reversed and remanded.