Ballard, Stephanie v. Christian Broadcast Network, Inc.

COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS

AT NASHVILLE

Stephanie Ballard, ) DOCKET #: 2014-06-0085

Employee, )

v. ) STATE FILE #:62509-2014

Christian Broadcast Network, Inc., )

Employer, ) DATE OF INJURY: August 6, 2014

and )

The Hartford, ) Judge Baker

Carrier. )

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER DENYING REQUESTED RELIEF

THIS CAUSE came to be heard before the undersigned Workers' Compensation

Judge on July 15, 2015, upon the amended Request for Expedited Hearing filed by

Stephanie Ballard, the employee, on June 1, 2015, pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated

section 50-6-239 (2014), to determine if the employer, Christian Broadcast Network, Inc.

(CBN), is obligated to provide medical and temporary disability benefits. Considering

the positions of the parties, the applicable law, and all of the evidence submitted, the

Court concludes that Ms. Ballard has not carried her burden of proving entitlement to

temporary disability or medical benefits at this time.

ANALYSIS

Issues

1. Whether CBN must provide Ms. Ballard with additional medical care for her wrist

injury.

2. Whether CBN must reimburse Ms. Ballard for past medical expenses and mileage.

3. Whether CBN must pay Ms. Ballard any past or future temporary total or

temporary partial disability benefits and, if so, the amount of those benefits.

Evidence Submitted

The Court admitted the exhibits listed below into evidence:

Exh. A Medical Records of Stephanie Ballard;1

Exh. B Affidavit of Stephanie Ballard, dated May 29, 2015;

Exh. C Medical records of Dr. James Anderson;

Exh. D Medical records of Dr. N.K. Singh;

Exh. E Form C-30A completed by Dr. Singh on January 28, 2015;

Exh. F Medical records of Dr. N.K. Singh;

Exh. G Medical Certificate completed by Dr. Singh on January 21, 2015.

The Court designates the following as the technical record:

 Dispute Certification Notice and attached documents including Petition for Benefit

Determination, January 29, 2015;

 Show Cause Order, May 6, 2015;

 Request for Expedited Hearing, May 14, 2015;

 Amended Request for Expedited Hearing, June 1, 2015;

 Wage Statement;

 Change of Address Notice for attorney T. Tamara Gauldin and attached letter.

The Court did not consider attachments to the above filings unless admitted into

evidence during the Expedited Hearing. The Court considered factual statements in the

above filings or any attachments thereto as allegations unless established by the evidence.

In addition to these exhibits and the technical record, Ms. Ballard provided in-

person testimony at the hearing.

History of Claim

Ms. Ballard is a thirty-four-year-old resident of Davidson County, Tennessee. Ms.

Ballard worked for CBN in the area of telephone ministry. Her job duties required her to

talk with individuals seeking help from the ministry and pray with them. Her job duties

also included typing.

While working on August 6, 2014, Ms. Ballard suffered an injury when her chair

fell over. CBN provided temporary disability, medical care and several panels of

physicians. After receiving treatment through U.S. Healthworks for several months, Ms.

Ballard selected Dr. N.K. Singh, an orthopedic specialist, to provide further care.

1

Several of the exhibits contain duplicate copies of these medical records. For simplicity, the Court has cited to the

individual exhibits, rather than Exhibit A, whenever possible.

2

Dr. Singh examined Ms. Ballard on November 26, 2014. (Ex. D.) The physical

examination of her wrists revealed “full flexion and extension, radial and ulnar deviation

with some discomfort. She has some tenderness to the volar aspect of the right and left

wrist.” Dr. Singh diagnosed Ms. Ballard with cervicalgia, cervical strain and paresthesias

of the right and left upper extremities. Dr. Singh also provided the following in his

treatment notes: “It is my opinion that although her work related injury has contributed

to more than 50% of her current neck complaints, I would not expect her current hand

complaints to be a continued complaint related to her injury of August 6, 2014.” Id. at 3.

Dr. Singh released Ms. Ballard to return to work without restrictions on November

26, 2014, but advised her that she might benefit from a nerve conduction study. Id. He

also scheduled her to return for a follow-up in two to three weeks. Id. at 4. Ms. Ballard

did not return for the follow-up. After Dr. Singh released her to return to work, CBN

stopped paying Ms. Ballard temporary disability benefits.

On December 30, 2014, Dr. Singh completed a C-30A Final Medical Report form

where he wrote that Ms. Ballard could return to work without restrictions on November

26, 2014. Id. at 5. Dr. Singh also indicated, on the same form, that Ms. Ballard had

reached maximum medical improvement (MMI) on December 17, 2014, and retained no

permanent physical impairment from her August 6, 2014 injury. Id.

CBN agreed to pay for the nerve conduction study recommended by Dr. Singh.

After Ms. Ballard had undergone the nerve conduction study, she returned to Dr. Singh to

discuss the results. (Ex. F.) The nerve study did not reveal any deficiencies in Ms.

Ballard’s upper extremities that would explain the source of her wrist pain. Id. In his

treatment notes, Dr. Singh stated, “[H]er current complaints are no longer related to her

injury of August 6, 2014.” Id. Dr. Singh advised Ms. Ballard to continue with her

physical therapy exercises at home and to follow-up with her primary care physician for

treatment outside of the workers’ compensation system. Id.

On January 21, 2015, Dr. Singh completed a Medical Certificate—a form

provided by the Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development’s

Unemployment Insurance Division—concerning his treatment of Ms. Ballard. (Ex. G.)

In that form, Dr. Singh indicated that he had treated Ms. Ballard for cervicalgia, cervical

strain and parasthesias of the right and left upper extremities. Id. Dr. Singh also

indicated that Ms. Ballard’s last period of employment caused these conditions and that

Ms. Ballard could return to regular duty on January 21, 2015. Id. The form further

asked Dr. Singh to state whether “the injury or condition was serious enough to

necessitate leaving usual work.” Id. Dr. Singh did not complete this portion of the form,

but, directly below this question, Dr. Singh wrote “11/26/14” to “1/21/15” as the period

of time for which Ms. Ballard’s injuries prevented her from performing her usual work.

Id.

3

On January 28, 2015, Dr. Singh completed a second form C-30A Final Medical

Report where he again indicated that Ms. Ballard had no permanent impairment and

could return to work without restrictions. (Ex. E.) In this report, however, Dr. Singh

stated that Ms. Ballard reached MMI on January 21, 2015. Id.

Ms. Ballard filed a Petition for Benefit Determination (PBD) on December 10,

2014, seeking medical and temporary disability benefits. The parties did not resolve the

disputed issues through mediation and the Mediation Specialist filed the Dispute

Certification Notice (DCN) on January 29, 2015. The Court held a show cause hearing

on May 4, 2015, when Ms. Ballard failed to request a hearing within sixty days. The

Court allowed Ms. Ballard additional time to file a request for hearing and she filed a

Request for Expedited Hearing on May 14, 2015. She filed her amended Request for

Expedited Hearing thereafter.

Ms. Ballard’s Contentions

Ms. Ballard argues that she suffered a compensable wrist injury and CBN should

pay for her treatment. She further claims that the wrist injury has prevented her from

working, so CBN should also pay her additional temporary disability benefits. As proof

of compensability and her inability to work, Ms. Ballard points to the Medical Certificate

Dr. Singh completed on January 21, 2015.

CBN’s Contentions

CBN argues that Ms. Ballard’s current wrist complaints are not related to her

August 6, 2014 injury. For that reason, she cannot recover additional medical benefits

for this condition. CBN further argues that Ms. Ballard recovered from her work-related

conditions, cervicalgia and a cervical strain, on November 26, 2014; Dr. Singh released

her to return to work that same day. Because she recovered from these conditions and

Dr. Singh released her to return work, CBN maintains that Ms. Ballard cannot recover

additional temporary disability benefits.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

Standard Applied

The Workers’ Compensation Law shall not be remedially or liberally construed in

favor of either party but shall be construed fairly, impartially and in accordance with

basic principles of statutory construction favoring neither the employee nor

employer. Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-116 (2014). An employee need not prove every

element of his or her claim by a preponderance of the evidence in order to obtain relief at

an expedited hearing. McCord v. Advantage Human Resourcing, No. 2014-06-0063,

4

2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 6, at *7-8, 9 (Tenn. Workers’ Comp. App. Bd.

Mar. 27, 2015). At an expedited hearing, an employee has the burden to come forward

with sufficient evidence from which the trial court can determine that the employee is

likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits. Id.

Factual Findings

Ms. Ballard suffered an injury when she fell from her chair while working at CBN

on August 7, 2014. Ms. Ballard selected Dr. N.K. Singh from a panel provided by CBN

as the treating orthopedic specialist. Dr. Singh completed two C-30A forms, one Medical

Certificate and made notes concerning Ms. Ballard’s treatment. The C-30A forms and

the Medical Certificate provide conflicting information as to the date Dr. Singh placed

Ms. Ballard at maximum medical improvement and opined that she could return to work

without restrictions. The treatment notes and the Medical Certificate provide conflicting

information on whether Ms. Ballard’s current complaints of wrist pain resulted from her

August 6, 2014 workplace injury.

Application of Law to Facts

Resolution of the disputes presented through this Request for Expedited Hearing

turns solely upon Dr. Singh’s opinion on two issues: (1) the date Ms. Ballard could return

to work without restriction and (2) whether the August 6, 2014 workplace accident

caused Ms. Ballard’s current wrist conditions.

With respect to the first issue, Dr. Singh completed three forms that address Ms.

Ballard’s release to return to work at full duty. The first form, a C-30A that Dr. Singh

completed on December 30, 2014, indicated that Ms. Ballard could return to regular duty

on November 26, 2014. (Ex. D, p. 5.) On the second form, a Medical Certificate that Dr.

Singh signed on January 21, 2015, Dr. Singh wrote “11/26/14” to “1/21/15” as the period

of time for which Ms. Ballard’s injuries prevented her from performing her usual work.

(Ex. G.) Dr. Singh also listed cervicalgia, cervical strain and parasthesias of the right and

left upper extremities as the conditions that he treated, and further indicated that Ms.

Ballard’s last period of employment caused these conditions. Id. However, Dr. Singh

failed to “circle” an answer to the direct question of whether Ms. Ballard’s injury was

“serious enough to necessitate leaving usual work[.]” Id. The third form, another C-30A

that Dr. Singh completed on January 28, 2015, indicated that Ms. Ballard could return to

regular duty on January 21, 2015. (Ex. E.)

The Court finds that the different release dates Dr. Singh provided on the C-30A

forms and the Medical Certificate cannot be reconciled. The date Dr. Singh released Ms.

Ballard to return to work is significant because Ms. Ballard has asked the Court to order

CBN to pay her additional temporary disability benefits from November 26, 2014. Under

the Workers’ Compensation Law, entitlement to temporary total disability benefits ends

5

whenever an employee is able to return to work or attains maximum medical

improvement. See Simpson v. Satterfield, 564 S.W.2d 953, 955 (Tenn. 1978).

Ms. Ballard bears the burden of proving every element of her claim including that

she could not return to work after November 26, 2014, because of her workplace injury.

See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(6) (2014). Furthermore, while Ms. Ballard must

only prove a likelihood of success on the merits to gain benefits at an expedited hearing,

she must supply sufficient competent proof.

Here, because the cause of the injuries she suffered is neither simple nor routine,

Ms. Ballard must present expert medical proof of a causal relationship between her

workplace injuries and her alleged inability to perform her job duties after November 26,

2014. See Orman v. Williams Sonoma, Inc., 803 S.W.2d 672, 676 (Tenn. 1991) (“Except

in the most obvious, simple and routine cases, the claimant in a workers’ compensation

action must establish by expert medical evidence the causal relationship alluded to above

between the claimed injury (and disability) and the employment activity.”).

Based on the evidence presented, however, this Court cannot determine when Dr.

Singh released Mr. Ballard to return to full duty work, as his expert opinions contain two

possible, yet irreconcilable, release dates. Without a clear opinion, Ms. Ballard is

unlikely to prevail on this issue at a hearing on the merits. Accordingly, the Court must

deny her request for temporary disability benefits at this time.

With respect to the second issue, whether the August 6, 2014 workplace accident

caused Ms. Ballard’s current wrist conditions, both parties have relied on Dr. Singh in

support of their positions. CBN points to the medical records in support of its position

that Ms. Ballard’s current wrist problems are not related to her August 6, 2014 workplace

accident. Dr. Singh included the following in his treatment notes: “It is my opinion that

although her work related injury has contributed to more than 50% of her current neck

complaints, I would not expect her current hand complaints to be a continued complaint

related to her injury of August 6, 2014.” (Ex. D, p. 3.)

Ms. Ballard cites the Medical Certificate Dr. Singh completed on January 21,

2015, where he indicated that he had treated Ms. Ballard for cervicalgia, cervical strain

and parasthesias of the right and left upper extremities. (Ex. G.) In the Medical

Certificate, Dr. Singh also indicated that Ms. Ballard’s last period of employment caused

these conditions. Id.

In comparing the two exhibits, the Court finds CBN’s position more persuasive.

In the treatment notes, Dr. Singh specifically stated that he did not “expect” Ms. Ballard’s

“current hand complaints” to be related to her August 6, 2014 workplace accident. Dr.

Singh confirmed his suspicions by reviewing the results of a nerve conduction study,

which revealed no irregularities. (Ex. F.) Concerning the Medical Certificate, while it is

6

true that Dr. Singh included parasthesias of the right and left upper extremities as a

condition for which he treated Ms. Ballard, the inclusion does not mean that it was the

wrist condition alone that prohibited her from working. Furthermore, Dr. Singh’s

inclusion of the condition on the Medical Certificate does not constitute an opinion that

her current wrist conditions arose primarily out of her employment for CBN.

At this Expedited Hearing, Ms. Ballard has the burden of proving a likelihood of

success at a final compensation hearing on the issues presented. While she would not

normally be required to prove medical causation at an Expedited Hearing, the Court finds

that Ms. Ballard had a duty to present some countervailing proof to overcome Dr. Singh’s

opinion that her work at CBN did not cause her current wrist complaints. Because she

presented no countervailing medical proof, she failed to carry her burden and her request

for medical benefits is denied.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows:

1. Ms. Ballard’s claim against CBN and The Hartford for the requested temporary

disability and medical benefits is denied. At this time, Ms. Ballard has not come

forward with sufficient evidence from which this Court concludes that she is likely

to prevail at a hearing on the merits.

2. This matter is set for Initial Hearing on September 14, 2015, at 10 a.m.

ENTERED THIS THE 28th DAY OF JULY, 2015.

_____________________________________

Judge Joshua Davis Baker

Court of Workers' Compensation Claims

Initial Hearing:

An Initial Hearing has been set with Judge Baker, Court of Workers’

Compensation Claims. You must call 615-741-2113 or toll free at 855-874-0474 to

participate in the Initial Hearing.

Please Note: You must call in on the scheduled date/time to

participate. Failure to call in may result in a determination of the issues without

your further participation. All conferences are set using Central Time (CT).

7

Right to Appeal:

Tennessee Law allows any party who disagrees with this Expedited Hearing Order

to appeal the decision to the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board. To file a Notice of

Appeal, you must:

1. Complete the enclosed form entitled: “Expedited Hearing Notice of Appeal.”

2. File the completed form with the Court Clerk within seven (7) business days of the

date the Workers’ Compensation Judge entered the Expedited Hearing Order.

3. Serve a copy of the Expedited Hearing Notice of Appeal upon the opposing party.

4. The appealing party is responsible for payment of a filing fee in the amount of

$75.00. Within ten (10) calendar days after the filing of a notice of appeal,

payment must be received by check, money order, or credit card

payment. Payments can be made in person at any Bureau office or by United

States mail, hand-delivery, or other delivery service. In the alternative, the

appealing party may file an Affidavit of Indigency, on a form prescribed by the

Bureau, seeking a waiver of the filing fee. The Affidavit of Indigency may be

filed contemporaneously with the Notice of Appeal or must be filed within ten

(10) calendar days thereafter. The Appeals Board will consider the Affidavit of

Indigency and issue an Order granting or denying the request for a waiver of the

filing fee as soon thereafter as is practicable. Failure to timely pay the filing fee

or file the Affidavit of Indigency in accordance with this section shall result in

dismissal of the appeal.

5. The parties, having the responsibility of ensuring a complete record on appeal,

may request from the Court Clerk the audio recording of the hearing for the

purpose of having a transcript prepared by a licensed court reporter and filing it

with the Court Clerk within ten (10) calendar days of the filing of the Expedited

Hearing Notice of Appeal. Alternatively, the parties may file a statement of the

evidence within ten (10) calendar days of the filing of the Expedited Hearing

Notice of Appeal. The Judge must approve the statement of the evidence before

the Clerk of Court shall submit the record to the Clerk of the Appeals Board.

6. If the appellant elects to file a position statement in support of the interlocutory

appeal, the appealing party shall file such position statement with the Court Clerk

within three (3) business days of the filing of the Expedited Hearing Notice of

Appeal, specifying the issues presented for review and including any argument in

support thereof. If the appellee elects to file a response in opposition to the

8

interlocutory appeal, appellee shall do so within three (3) business days of the

filing of the appellant’s position statement.

9

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the Expedited Hearing Order was

sent to the following recipients by the following methods of service on this the 28th day

of July, 2015.

Name Certified First Via Fax Via Email Address

Mail Class Fax Number Email

Mail

Stephanie Ballard X X spnailsalon@gmail.com

T. Tamara Gauldin X Tamara.gauldin@thehartford.com

_____________________________________

Penny Shrum, Clerk of Court

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

WC.CourtClerk@tn.gov

10