Opinion

Spain, Amanda v. Health South Cane Creek Rehab Hospital

  • 2015 TN WC 94
Court
Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
Filed
Aug 4, 2015
Status
Published
On the bench
Allen Phillips
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 12.4%

The opinion

COURT OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS

AT JACKSON

AMANDA SPAIN ) Docket No.: 2015-07-0086

Employee, )

v. ) State File No.: 10923/2015

)

HEALTH SOUTH CANE CREEK ) Date of Injury: February 10, 2015

REHAB HOSPITAL

Employer, )

And · ) Judge: ALLEN PHILLIPS

ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY )

)

Insurance Carrier. )

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER GRANTING TEMPORARY

DISABILITY BENEFITS

THIS CAUSE came before the undersigned Workers' Compensation Judge upon

the Request for Expedited Hearing filed by Amanda Spain (Ms. Spain), the Employee, on

June 16, 2015, with the Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims, pursuant to

Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-239 (2014) to determine if temporary disability

benefits should be initiated.

The undersigned Workers' Compensation Judge conducted an in-person

evidentiary hearing on July 8, 2015. Ms. Spain testified live at the Expedited Hearing.

No representative of Health South testified.

Considering the positions of the parties, the applicable law, and the evidence

submitted, the Court hereby finds that Ms. Spain would likely prevail at a hearing on the

merits and is entitled to temporary partial disability benefits.

1

ANALYSIS

Issue

Whether Ms. Spain is entitled to temporary disability benefits.

Evidence Submitted

Stipulations of the Parties:

• Date oflnjury: February 10, 2015;

• Average Weekly Wage: $620.05/Compensation Rate: $413.38;

• Dr. Ragsdale is the authorized treating physician; and,

• Ms. Spain's period of temporary disability, if owed, began on May 27,

2015, and continues until Ms. Spain reaches maximum medical

improvement (MMI) or is able to return to work.

The Court admitted the following exhibits into evidence:

1. Medical records ofDr. Ragsdale;

2. Wage Statement;

3. Employee Counseling Form dated November 7, 2014;

4. Employee Counseling Form dated January 22, 2015; and,

5. Employee Counseling Form dated April3, 2015.

The Court designated the following as the technical record:

• Petition for Benefit Determination (PBD);

• Dispute Certification Notice (DCN); and,

• Request for Expedited Hearing.

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.

History of Claim

Ms. Spain is a thirty-five-year-old resident of Gibson County, Tennessee. Health

South Cane Creek Rehab Hospital (Health South) is a rehabilitation hospital in Martin,

Tennessee. Ms. Spain began working for Health South on August 26, 2002. In 2014 and

2015, Ms. Spain worked as a unit secretary. Her job duties included: transcribing

physicians' orders, creating new admission charts, breaking down discharge charts, and

2

hatching. She also answered the telephone, passed lunch trays to residents, and ordered

supplies. She spent hours at a time using her hands and fingers inputting data into a

computer. Her job duties differed from day to day.

Ms. Spain testified that her symptoms in her hands existed for a couple of years;

however, the problems worsened in January 2015. At that time, she lost grip strength and

her hands were constantly numb. After reporting the injury to her employer, Ms. Spain

selected Dr. Blake Ragsdale from a panel of physicians offered by Health South.

On February 20, 2015, Ms. Spain saw Dr. Ragsdale and complained of pain,

numbness, and tingling in both hands and wrists. Upon examination, Dr. Ragsdale

diagnosed numbness, wrist pain, and hand pain. Because he suspected carpal tunnel

syndrome, he ordered a nerve conduction study. The study confirmed moderate left

carpal tunnel syndrome and mild right carpal tunnel syndrome. As a result, Dr. Ragsdale

recommended bilateral carpal tunnel release.

Prior to her first surgery, Health South terminated Ms. Spain on April 3, 2015, for

violation of company policy. Health South cited the following violations as the basis for

her termination: "unapproved overtime, failure to comply with set hours each day, and a

total of three occurrences since the revised attendance policy set forth on January 28,

2015." (Ex. 5.) Ms. Spain disagreed with Health South using the attendance policy as a

basis for termination and contended that other employees who violated the same policy

were not terminated. However, Ms. Spain acknowledged that she did have unapproved

overtime and failed to comply with her set hours each day.

After her termination, Ms. Spain continued treatment with Dr. Ragsdale. On April

8, 2015, he performed a left carpal tunnel release. Following surgery, Dr. Ragsdale

imposed the following light-duty restrictions: "light use of the [left] hand, no forceful

gripping or pulling, and no lifting weight greater than one pound." (Ex. 1.) Ms. Spain

testified that she was capable of performing her job duties at Health South within these

light-duty restrictions, had she not been terminated. Thus, she does not seek any

temporary disability for the period of time she was on light-duty restrictions for her left

wrist following her first surgery.

Dr. Ragsdale subsequently performed a right carpal tunnel release on May 27,

2015. The operative report was the last medical record admitted into evidence; therefore,

there is no medical record before the Court indicating the light-duty restrictions assigned

by Dr. Ragsdale following Ms. Spain's right-wrist surgery. However, Ms. Spain's

uncontradicted testimony in Court was that Dr. Ragsdale restricted her from any

repetitive motion or heavy lifting and no lifting greater than two pounds until her next

visit, when he increased the weight restriction to five pounds. Ms. Spain testified that she

could not have done her job as a unit secretary with her restrictions on both hands.

Specifically, she would have been unable to repetitively write, type, or transcribe orders.

3

Moreover, Ms. Spain would have been unable to able to pick up a chart, because the

charts weigh in excess of five pounds.

Ms. Spain remains on light-duty restrictions from Dr. Ragsdale. She still treats for

her work injury and has not yet achieved MMI. Ms. Spain returns to Dr. Ragsdale on

August 17, 2015, for follow-up care.

Ms. Spain, through counsel, filed a PBD on May 18, 2015, initially seeking both

medical and temporary disability benefits. The parties subsequently resolved the medical

benefits issue. However, the parties did not resolve the temporary disability Issue

through mediation and the Mediation Specialist filed the DCN on June 12, 2015.

Ms. Spain's Contentions

Ms. Spain contends that she is entitled to temporary disability benefits from May

27, 2015, until either she reaches MMI or Dr. Rasgdale returns her to regular duty. She

asserts that, despite her termination, she is nevertheless entitled to temporary disability

benefits, because her restrictions following her surgery on May 27, 2015, would have

precluded her from performing her job duties as a unit secretary for Health South.

Health South's Contentions

Health South concedes that but for Ms. Spain's termination for cause, she would

have been entitled to temporary disability benefits for the stipulated time period

beginning on May 27, 2015, in light of Dr. Ragsdale's restrictions. However, Health

South contends that Ms. Spain's termination for cause precludes her from receiving

temporary disability. Relying on the holding in Carter v. First Source, 92 S.W.3d 367,

(Tenn. 2002), Health South asserts that they are permitted to enforce their workplace

rules and Ms. Spain should not benefit from her legitimate termination for violation of

those work rules.

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,

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

4

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. Spain sustained a work-related injury on February 10, 2015, diagnosed as

bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. Health South accepted the claim as compensable. Dr.

Ragsdale, the authorized treating physician, placed restrictions upon the use of Ms.

Spain's arms following each carpal tunnel release. Ms. Spain testified in an honest and

forthright manner concerning her symptoms in her hands and wrists and the impact of Dr.

Ragsdale's light-duty restrictions on her ability to perform her job. She testified that she

could have performed her job duties as a unit secretary for Health South within her light-

duty restrictions following her left carpal tunnel release.

Likewise, Ms. Spain's testified regarding her inability to perform her job duties

based upon Dr. Ragsdale's restrictions following her right carpal tunnel release. She

would have been unable to repetitively write, type, or transcribe orders. Moreover, Ms.

Spain would have been unable to able to pick up a chart since the charts weigh in excess

of five pounds.

Health South terminated Ms. Spain for cause on April 3, 2015. There was no

proof at the Expedited Hearing that Health South could have accommodated Ms. Spain's

light-duty restrictions if she had not been terminated.

Application ofLaw to Facts

Ms. Spain is entitled to temporary partial disability benefits.

Temporary total disability (TTD) is payable to an injured employee who is totally

disabled to work by her injury and while she is recovering as far as the nature of the

injury permits. Cleek v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 19 S.W.3d 770, 776 (Tenn. 2000). Under

Tennessee law, to establish entitlement to temporary total benefits, the employee must

show she was "(1) totally disabled to work by a compensable injury; (2) that there was a

causal connection between the injury and her inability to work; and (3) the duration of

that period of disability." Id. When an employee demonstrates the ability to return to

work or attains MMI, then TTD benefits are terminated. Simpson v. Satterfield, 564

S.W.2d 953, 955 (Tenn. 1978). Here, Ms. Spain has not demonstrated by the evidence

submitted that she was totally disabled from working. Instead, she has restrictions on her

activities. Thus, she is not entitled to temporary total disability benefits. However, Ms.

Spain may still meet the criteria for an award of temporary partial disability (TPD)

benefits.

Temporary partial disability (TPD) refers to the time during which the injured

5

employee is able to resume some gainful employment but has not yet reached maximum

recovery. Williams v. Saturn Corp., No. M2004-01215-WC-R3-CV, 2005 LEXIS 1032,

*3 (Tenn. Workers' Comp. Panel Nov. 15, 2005). As with TTD, there must be adequate

proof of a causal connection between the injury and the disability for an award of TPD.

Health South accepted Ms. Spain's injury as a compensable work injury; therefore, there

is no question that a causal connection existed between the injury and the disability. It is

also agreed that Ms. Spain had not reached MMI during the contested time frame. This

Court finds Ms. Spain has demonstrated the likelihood of prevailing at a hearing on the

merits as to an inability to work within her restrictions from Dr. Ragsdale.

It is well-settled authority in Tennessee that an employer should be permitted to

enforce workplace rules without being penalized in a workers' compensation case.

Carter v. First Source Furniture Group, 92 S.W.3d 367, 368 (Tenn. 2002). The Court

carefully considered Health South's position that, under Carter, Ms. Spain's termination

for cause precludes her from receiving temporary disability benefits even though Health

South could not have accommodated her light-duty restrictions had she remained

employed. The Court disagrees. An employer cannot avoid paying temporary disability

benefits when they have no light-duty work within an injured worker's restrictions. In

the present case, Health South conceded that, but for Ms. Spain's termination, she would

have been entitled to temporary disability benefits for the relevant period. The Court is

aware of no Tennessee authority that disqualifies an employee from receiving temporary

disability benefits under the facts as shown by the evidence submitted. The Court finds

Ms. Spain credible when she testified that she could not perform the required job

functions when on restrictions from Dr. Ragsdale as of May 27, 2015, and ongoing.

There is no countervailing proof. Accordingly, the Court finds that Ms. Spain has

demonstrated the likelihood of prevailing at a hearing on the merits as to her entitlement

to TPD benefits.

TPD is two-thirds (2/3) of the difference between the average weekly wage and

what the employee is able to earn in her partially disabled condition. Tenn. Code Ann. §

50-6-207(2)(2014). Here, the stipulated average weekly wage is $620.05 (Ex. 2.) and

Ms. Spain is not, due to her restrictions, able to earn a wage. Therefore, her TPD rate is

two-thirds (2/3) of $620.05 or $413.38. She is entitled to TPD from May 27, 2015, and

ongoing until released without restrictions, or able to resume gainful employment at a job

earning the same or better wage she received prior to her injury, or until placed at MMI.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows :

1. The amount of temporary disability benefit is $413.38 per week based on Ms.

Spain's average weekly wage of620.05.

2. Payment of past due benefits in the amount of $4,133.80 shall be made for the

period from May 27, 2015, to August 3, 2015, a period often weeks.

6

3. Health South or its workers' compensation carrier shall continue to pay to Ms.

Spain temporary disability benefits in regular intervals, at the rate of $413.3 8 per

week, until she is no longer eligible for those benefits by 1) reaching MMI; 2) by

returning to work at a wage equal to or greater than the pre-injury wage, or 3) by

release without restrictions by the authorized treating physician. Health South's

representative shall immediately notify the Bureau, Ms. Spain and Ms. Spain's

counsel of the intent to terminate temporary disability benefits by filing Form C-

26, citing the basis for the termination.

4. This matter is set for Initial Hearing on September 15, 2015, at 10:00 a.m. (CDT).

5. Unless interlocutory appeal of the Expedited Hearing Order is filed,

compliance with this Order must occur no later than seven (7) business days

from the date of entry of this Order as required by Tennessee Code

Annotated section 50-6-239(d)(3) (2014). The Insurer or Self-Insured

Employer must submit confirmation of compliance with this Order to the

Bureau by email to WCCompliance.Program@tn.gov no later than the

seventh (7th) business day after entry of this Order. Failure to submit the

necessary confirmation within the period of compliance may result in a

penalty assessment for non-compliance.

6. For questions regarding compliance, please contact the Workers' Compensation

Compliance Unit via email WCCompliance.Program@tn.gov or by calling (615)

253-1471 or (615) 532-1309.

ENTERED this the 4th day of August, 201 .

Judge Allen Phillip

Court of Workers' Com pens

Initial Hearing:

An Initial Hearing has been set with Judge Phillips, Court of Workers'

Compensation Claims. You must call 731-422-5263 or toll free at 855-543-5038 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

7

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

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 a.ppeal.

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 (1 0) calendar days of the filing of the Expedited Hearing

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

the Court Clerk may 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.

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 4th day of

August, 20 15.

Name Certified Via Via Service sent to:

Mail Fax Email

James Webb X amy~newmanwebb.com

Eugene S. Forrester, Jr. X esf(a)farris-law.com

_/) ~~ -

P~h ·urn, Clerk of Court

Court of orkers' Compensation Claims

WC.CourtClerk@tn.gov

9

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.