Neb. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 48
Nebraska Revised Statutes

Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (2026)

Employees; rehabilitation services; directory of service providers, counselors, and specialists; vocational rehabilitation plan; priorities; Attorney General; duties; compensation court; powers; duties

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NE-LEGnebraskalegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) One of the primary purposes of the Nebraska Workers' Compensation Act is restoration of the injured employee to gainful employment. To this end the Nebraska Workers' Compensation Court may employ one or more specialists in vocational rehabilitation. Salaries, other benefits, and administrative expenses incurred by the compensation court for purposes of vocational rehabilitation shall be paid from the Compensation Court Cash Fund.

(2) Vocational rehabilitation specialists employed by the court shall continuously study the problems of vocational rehabilitation and shall maintain a directory of individual service providers, counselors, and specialists which have been approved by the Nebraska Workers' Compensation Court. The compensation court may approve as qualified such individual service providers, counselors, and specialists as are capable of rendering competent vocational rehabilitation services to injured employees. No individual service provider, counselor, or specialist shall be considered qualified to provide vocational rehabilitation services to injured employees unless he or she has satisfied the standards for certification established by the compensation court and has been certified by the compensation court.

(3) When as a result of the injury an employee is unable to perform suitable work for which he or she has previous training or experience, he or she is entitled to such vocational rehabilitation services, including job placement and training, as may be reasonably necessary to restore him or her to suitable employment. Vocational rehabilitation training costs shall be paid from the Workers' Compensation Trust Fund. When vocational rehabilitation training requires residence at or near a facility or institution away from the employee's customary residence, whether within or without this state, the reasonable costs of his or her board, lodging, and travel shall be paid from the Workers' Compensation Trust Fund.

If entitlement to vocational rehabilitation services is claimed by the employee, the employee and the employer or his or her insurer shall attempt to agree on the choice of a vocational rehabilitation counselor from the directory of vocational rehabilitation counselors established pursuant to subsection (2) of this section. If they are unable to agree on a vocational rehabilitation counselor, the employee or employer or his or her insurer shall notify the compensation court, and a vocational rehabilitation specialist of the compensation court shall select a counselor from the directory of vocational rehabilitation counselors established pursuant to subsection (2) of this section. Only one such vocational rehabilitation counselor may provide vocational rehabilitation services at any one time, and any change in the choice of a vocational rehabilitation counselor shall be approved by a vocational rehabilitation specialist or judge of the compensation court. The vocational rehabilitation counselor so chosen or selected shall evaluate the employee and, if necessary, develop and implement a vocational rehabilitation plan. Any such plan shall be evaluated by a vocational rehabilitation specialist of the compensation court and approved by such specialist or a judge of the compensation court prior to implementation. In evaluating a plan the specialist shall make an independent determination as to whether the proposed plan is likely to result in suitable employment for the injured employee that is consistent with the priorities listed in this subsection. It is a rebuttable presumption that any vocational rehabilitation plan developed by such vocational rehabilitation counselor and approved by a vocational rehabilitation specialist of the compensation court is an appropriate form of vocational rehabilitation. The fee for the evaluation and for the development and implementation of the vocational rehabilitation plan shall be paid by the employer or his or her workers' compensation insurer. The compensation court may establish a fee schedule for services rendered by a vocational rehabilitation counselor. Any loss-of-earning-power evaluation performed by a vocational rehabilitation counselor shall be performed by a counselor from the directory established pursuant to subsection (2) of this section and chosen or selected according to the procedures described in this subsection. It is a rebuttable presumption that any opinion expressed as the result of such a loss-of-earning-power evaluation is correct.

The following priorities shall be used in developing and evaluating a vocational rehabilitation plan. No higher priority may be utilized unless all lower priorities have been determined by the vocational rehabilitation counselor and a vocational rehabilitation specialist or judge of the compensation court to be unlikely to result in suitable employment for the injured employee that is consistent with the priorities listed in this subsection. If a lower priority is clearly inappropriate for the employee, the next higher priority shall be utilized. The priorities are, listed in order from lower to higher priority:

(a) Return to the previous job with the same employer;

(b) Modification of the previous job with the same employer;

(c) A new job with the same employer;

(d) A job with a new employer; or

(e) A period of formal training which is designed to lead to employment in another career field.

(4) The compensation court may cooperate on a reciprocal basis with federal and state agencies for vocational rehabilitation services or with any public or private agency.

(5) The Attorney General, when requested by the administrator of the compensation court, may file a motion pursuant to section 48-162.03 regarding any issue related to vocational rehabilitation services or costs pursuant to this section. The Attorney General shall be considered a party for purposes of such motion. The Attorney General may initiate an original action before the compensation court or may intervene in a pending action and become a party to the litigation. Any such motion shall be heard by a judge of the compensation court other than the presiding judge.

(6) An employee who has suffered an injury covered by the Nebraska Workers' Compensation Act is entitled to prompt physical and medical rehabilitation services. If physical or medical rehabilitation services are not voluntarily offered and accepted, the compensation court or any judge thereof on its or his or her own motion, or upon application of the employee or employer, and after affording the parties an opportunity to be heard by the compensation court or judge thereof, may refer the employee to a facility, institution, physician, or other individual service provider capable of rendering competent physical or medical rehabilitation services for evaluation and report of the practicability of, need for, and kind of service or treatment necessary and appropriate to render him or her fit for a remunerative occupation, and the costs of such evaluation and report involving physical or medical rehabilitation shall be borne by the employer or his or her workers' compensation insurer. Upon receipt of such report and after affording the parties an opportunity to be heard, the compensation court or judge thereof may order that the physical or medical services and treatment recommended in the report or other necessary physical or medical rehabilitation treatment or service be provided at the expense of the employer or his or her workers' compensation insurer.

When physical or medical rehabilitation requires residence at or near the facility or institution away from the employee's customary residence, whether within or without this state, the reasonable costs of his or her board, lodging, and travel shall be paid for by the employer or his or her workers' compensation insurer in addition to any other benefits payable under the Nebraska Workers' Compensation Act, including weekly compensation benefits for temporary disability.

(7) If the injured employee without reasonable cause refuses to undertake or fails to cooperate with a physical, medical, or vocational rehabilitation program determined by the compensation court or judge thereof to be suitable for him or her or refuses to be evaluated under subsection (3) or (6) of this section or fails to cooperate in such evaluation, the compensation court or judge thereof may suspend, reduce, or limit the compensation otherwise payable under the Nebraska Workers' Compensation Act. The compensation court or judge thereof may also modify a previous finding, order, award, or judgment relating to physical, medical, or vocational rehabilitation services as necessary in order to accomplish the goal of restoring the injured employee to gainful and suitable employment, or as otherwise required in the interest of justice.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 99 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1974–2024 · leading case: Rodriguez v. Monfort, Inc., 635 N.W.2d 439 (Neb. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rodriguez v. Monfort, Inc., 635 N.W.2d 439 (Neb. 2001). · cites it 28× “In its order filed June 2,2000, the review panel, with one judge dissenting, concluded that pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (3) (Cum. Supp.”
Spratt v. Crete Carrier Corp., 311 Neb. 262 (Neb. 2022). · cites it 29× “Pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (7) (Reissue 2021), where a prior award of the Nebraska Workers’ Compensation Court has provided medical or physical rehabilitation services, the compensation court may modify the award of such services to the extent the court finds such…”
Bower v. Eaton Corp., 301 Neb. 311 (Neb. 2018). · cites it 6× “38 To determine whether findings of fact made by the compensation court support an order granting or denying vocational rehabilitation benefits, an appellate court must consider the findings of fact in light of the statute authorizing vocational rehabilitation benefits, Neb.…”
Frauendorfer v. Lindsay Mfg. Co., 639 N.W.2d 125 (Neb. 2002). · cites it 8× “We determine that there was sufficient evidence to support the trial judge’s award and that the presumption of correctness afforded to the loss of earning power evaluation from the agreed-upon rehabilitation counselor under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (3) (Supp. 1999) was…”
Green v. Drivers Mgmt., Inc., 639 N.W.2d 94 (Neb. 2002). · cites it 9× “As to vocational rehabilitation, the Court of Appeals concluded that since there is no longer a requirement in the text of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (Reissue 1998) that an injured worker have a permanent disability to be eligible for vocational rehabilitation benefits, the…”
Anderson v. EMCOR Grp., 298 Neb. 174 (Neb. 2017). · cites it 12× “To determine whether findings of fact made by the compensation court support an order granting or denying vocational rehabilitation benefits, an appellate court must consider the findings of fact in light of the statute autho- rizing vocational rehabilitation benefits, Neb. Rev.…”
Yager v. Bellco Midwest, 464 N.W.2d 335 (Neb. 1991). · cites it 12× “To determine whether findings of fact made by the compensation court support an order granting or denying vocational rehabilitation benefits, we must consider the findings of fact in light of the statute authorizing vocational rehabilitation benefits, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01…”
Sidel v. Travelers Ins., 288 N.W.2d 482 (Neb. 1980). · cites it 8× “(2) In holding the claimant is entitled to rehabilitative services under the provisions of section 48-162.01 (3), R. S. Supp., 1978.”
Lowe v. Drivers Mgmt., Inc., 743 N.W.2d 82 (Neb. 2007). · cites it 14× “However, pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (7) (Cum. Supp.”
Dawes v. Wittrock Sandblasting & Painting, Inc., 667 N.W.2d 167 (Neb. 2003). · cites it 4× “See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (3) (Supp. 1999).”
Variano v. Dial Corp., 589 N.W.2d 845 (Neb. 1999). · cites it 13× “In this workers’ compensation case, each party claims the benefit of a rebuttable presumption pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (Reissue 1998), based upon seemingly inconsistent opinions regarding loss of earning power expressed by the same court-appointed vocational…”
McGowan v. Lockwood Corp., 511 N.W.2d 118 (Neb. 1994). · cites it 8× “McGowan’s Right to Vocational Rehabilitation Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (Reissue 1988) sets forth the situations in which the compensation court can award vocational rehabilitation benefits.”
Show all 99 citing cases →
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01(1) — 12 cases
Bower v. Eaton Corp., 301 Neb. 311 (Neb. 2018). “38 To determine whether findings of fact made by the compensation court support an order granting or denying vocational rehabilitation benefits, an appellate court must consider the findings of fact in light of the statute authorizing vocational rehabilitation benefits, Neb.…”
Yager v. Bellco Midwest, 464 N.W.2d 335 (Neb. 1991). “To determine whether findings of fact made by the compensation court support an order granting or denying vocational rehabilitation benefits, we must consider the findings of fact in light of the statute authorizing vocational rehabilitation benefits, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01…”
Variano v. Dial Corp., 589 N.W.2d 845 (Neb. 1999). “In this workers’ compensation case, each party claims the benefit of a rebuttable presumption pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (Reissue 1998), based upon seemingly inconsistent opinions regarding loss of earning power expressed by the same court-appointed vocational…”
Anderson v. EMCOR Grp., 298 Neb. 174 (Neb. 2017). “To determine whether findings of fact made by the compensation court support an order granting or denying vocational rehabilitation benefits, an appellate court must consider the findings of fact in light of the statute autho- rizing vocational rehabilitation benefits, Neb. Rev.…”
Behrens v. Am. Stores Packing Co., 421 N.W.2d 12 (Neb. 1988).
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01(2) — 3 cases
Variano v. Dial Corp., 589 N.W.2d 845 (Neb. 1999). “In this workers’ compensation case, each party claims the benefit of a rebuttable presumption pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (Reissue 1998), based upon seemingly inconsistent opinions regarding loss of earning power expressed by the same court-appointed vocational…”
Romero v. IBP, Inc., 623 N.W.2d 332 (Neb. Ct. App. 2001).
Paz v. Monfort, Inc., 492 N.W.2d 894 (Neb. Ct. App. 1992).
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01(3) — 43 cases
Rodriguez v. Monfort, Inc., 635 N.W.2d 439 (Neb. 2001). “In its order filed June 2,2000, the review panel, with one judge dissenting, concluded that pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (3) (Cum. Supp.”
Frauendorfer v. Lindsay Mfg. Co., 639 N.W.2d 125 (Neb. 2002). “We determine that there was sufficient evidence to support the trial judge’s award and that the presumption of correctness afforded to the loss of earning power evaluation from the agreed-upon rehabilitation counselor under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (3) (Supp. 1999) was…”
Bower v. Eaton Corp., 301 Neb. 311 (Neb. 2018). “38 To determine whether findings of fact made by the compensation court support an order granting or denying vocational rehabilitation benefits, an appellate court must consider the findings of fact in light of the statute authorizing vocational rehabilitation benefits, Neb.…”
Dawes v. Wittrock Sandblasting & Painting, Inc., 667 N.W.2d 167 (Neb. 2003). “See Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (3) (Supp. 1999).”
Stacy v. Great Lakes Agri Mktg., Inc., 753 N.W.2d 785 (Neb. 2008).
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01(3)(a) — 1 case
Anderson v. EMCOR Grp., 298 Neb. 174 (Neb. 2017). “To determine whether findings of fact made by the compensation court support an order granting or denying vocational rehabilitation benefits, an appellate court must consider the findings of fact in light of the statute autho- rizing vocational rehabilitation benefits, Neb. Rev.…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01(3)(d) — 1 case
Anderson v. EMCOR Grp., 298 Neb. 174 (Neb. 2017). “To determine whether findings of fact made by the compensation court support an order granting or denying vocational rehabilitation benefits, an appellate court must consider the findings of fact in light of the statute autho- rizing vocational rehabilitation benefits, Neb. Rev.…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01(3)(e) — 1 case
Anderson v. EMCOR Grp., 298 Neb. 174 (Neb. 2017). “To determine whether findings of fact made by the compensation court support an order granting or denying vocational rehabilitation benefits, an appellate court must consider the findings of fact in light of the statute autho- rizing vocational rehabilitation benefits, Neb. Rev.…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01(6) — 10 cases
Yager v. Bellco Midwest, 464 N.W.2d 335 (Neb. 1991). “To determine whether findings of fact made by the compensation court support an order granting or denying vocational rehabilitation benefits, we must consider the findings of fact in light of the statute authorizing vocational rehabilitation benefits, Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01…”
Green v. Drivers Mgmt., Inc., 639 N.W.2d 94 (Neb. 2002). “As to vocational rehabilitation, the Court of Appeals concluded that since there is no longer a requirement in the text of Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (Reissue 1998) that an injured worker have a permanent disability to be eligible for vocational rehabilitation benefits, the…”
Luehring v. Tibbs Constr. Co., 457 N.W.2d 815 (Neb. 1990).
Sherwood v. Gooch Milling & Elevator Co., 453 N.W.2d 461 (Neb. 1990).
Spratt v. Crete Carrier Corp., 311 Neb. 262 (Neb. 2022). “Pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (7) (Reissue 2021), where a prior award of the Nebraska Workers’ Compensation Court has provided medical or physical rehabilitation services, the compensation court may modify the award of such services to the extent the court finds such…”
— Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01(7) — 8 cases
Spratt v. Crete Carrier Corp., 311 Neb. 262 (Neb. 2022). “Pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (7) (Reissue 2021), where a prior award of the Nebraska Workers’ Compensation Court has provided medical or physical rehabilitation services, the compensation court may modify the award of such services to the extent the court finds such…”
Lowe v. Drivers Mgmt., Inc., 743 N.W.2d 82 (Neb. 2007). “However, pursuant to Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-162.01 (7) (Cum. Supp.”
McKay v. Hershey Food Corp., 740 N.W.2d 378 (Neb. Ct. App. 2007).
Spratt v. Crete Carrier Corp., 311 Neb. 262 (Neb. 2022).
Boger v. Magnus Co. (Neb. Ct. App. 2014).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.