## Facts

- Georgia A. Gunter worked for Fischer Scientific American.
- Gunter claimed she injured her back at work on two occasions: May 2, 1980 (moving a box of gallon containers) and September 26, 1980 (lifting a metal chair).
- Gunter filed workers’ compensation claim petitions seeking benefits for permanent disability.
- At the hearing, Gunter presented medical testimony supporting permanent disability, including:
  - Orthopedic testimony from Dr. Shaw estimating partial permanent orthopedic disability of about 15% of total, with a component attributed to sciatic nerve involvement; and
  - Neuropsychiatric testimony from Dr. Pollack estimating about 12.5% total permanent neuropsychiatric disability, with overlap described between claimed conditions.
- Fischer presented medical testimony disputing the extent of disability, but Fischer’s orthopedist still estimated a small amount of permanent orthopedic disability (about 2% of total) from lumbosacral strain, attributing it to the 1980 incidents together with a prior back injury in June 1979.
- Gunter attempted to introduce medical reports prepared by Dr. Glass, her treating physician, and Dr. Glass’s office records through testimony from the doctor’s office manager.
- The judge of compensation excluded Dr. Glass’s reports and office records, ruling that Dr. Glass himself had to testify.
- The judge of compensation rejected Gunter’s claimed neurological and psychiatric disability and rejected the orthopedic claim, stating that, based on Dr. Shaw’s testimony, there was “very little evidence of any objective findings,” and entered judgment denying compensation for permanent disability.
- Gunter appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the judge of compensation erred by excluding Dr. Glass’s treating reports and office records offered through the office manager on the ground that Dr. Glass did not testify.
2. Whether the judge of compensation’s finding of no permanent disability under N.J.S.A. 34:15-36 was adequately supported and explained, given the medical proofs, including testimony acknowledging some permanent orthopedic impairment.

## Decision

- The Appellate Division reversed the judgment denying permanent disability benefits and remanded.
- The court held that excluding Dr. Glass’s reports and office records was error in the workers’ compensation setting, where evidentiary practice is less formal and reliable medical documentation should generally be received.
- The court held the judge’s rejection of all permanent disability was stated too generally to permit meaningful review, especially in light of the overall medical record, including Fischer’s own expert’s estimate of some permanent orthopedic disability.
- On remand, the judge of compensation was directed to admit and consider the excluded documentary medical evidence and to make more specific findings after considering all proofs.

## Legal Principles

- Workers’ compensation hearings apply evidentiary rules with flexibility; a judge should not exclude reliable treating-physician reports and office records solely because the physician is not called as a live witness, particularly when authenticity is supported by competent testimony.
- N.J.S.A. 34:15-36 requires permanent disability to be shown by “demonstrable objective medical evidence” of a permanent impairment that restricts bodily function; the statutory exclusion for minor contusions and strains does not permit a conclusory denial when the medical record supports some permanent impairment.
- A judge of compensation must issue findings of fact and reasoning with enough detail to allow appellate review, including a clear evaluation of competing medical opinions and the objective basis for accepting or rejecting claimed disabilities.

## Conclusion

In *Gunter v. Fischer Scientific American*, the Appellate Division reversed a denial of permanent disability benefits because the compensation judge improperly excluded the claimant’s treating-physician reports and office records and then issued an inadequately explained finding of no permanent disability under N.J.S.A. 34:15-36 despite medical testimony (including the employer’s) indicating some permanent orthopedic impairment; the case was remanded for admission of the documentary evidence and more specific findings on all claimed disabilities.


Gunter v. Fischer Scientific American, 475 A.2d 671, 193 N. J. Super. 688 (1984)