Opinion

Perry, Amanda v. Ocoee Sycamore Retirement Center, LLC

  • 2019 TN WC 1
Court
Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
Filed
Jan 2, 2019
Status
Published
On the bench
Robert Durham
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

FILED

Jan 02, 2019

02:02 PM(CT)

TENNESSEE COURT OF

WORKERS' COMPENSATION

CLAIMS

TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION

IN THE COURT OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS

AT GRAY

AMANDA PERRY, ) Docket No. 2018-02-0065

Employee, )

v. )

OCOEE SYCAMORE )

RETIREMENT CENTER, LLC ) State File No. 41001-2017

Employer, )

and )

GREAT AM. ALLIANCE INS. CO., )

Carrier. ) Judge Robert Durham

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER DENYING MEDICAL BENEFITS

This case came before the Court for an Expedited Hearing on December 19, 2018.

The issue is whether Ms. Perry is entitled to reimbursement for unauthorized medical

expenses following settlement of her workers' compensation claim. The Court holds that

Ms. Perry is not likely to establish that Ocoee Sycamore Retirement Center (OSRC) is

required to pay her unauthorized expenses and denies her request.

History of Claim

On June 5, 2017, Ms. Perry injured her thoracic and lumbar spine at work. After

conservative care failed to resolve her symptoms, OSRC provided a panel of

neurosurgeons, and she chose Dr. Jody Helms to provide authorized treatment.

On Ms. Perry's first visit, Dr. Helms noted her MRI revealed a T12-L1 herniated

disc, which he attributed to her work injury, as well as a small, degenerative disc bulge at

L5-S 1. He did not feel her complaints corresponded to lumbar radiculopathy. He

ordered additional physical therapy, which Ms. Perry underwent, but it only provided

minor relief. She returned to Dr. Helms complaining of pain down her leg and her

shoulder blades and chest. Dr. Helms did not believe that the arm and chest complaints

were due to radiculopathy or that her leg complaints required surgical care. He

recommended a steroid injection, which Ms. Perry declined. Therefore, at her request, he

ordered chiropractic visits and more physical therapy.

When Ms. Perry returned, she told Dr. Helms that conservative care helped some,

but she still experienced low back pain as well as numbness and tingling in both legs. Dr.

Helms observed that her symptoms did not follow a dermatomal pattern, ruling out

radiculopathy. She also complained of neck pain and dizziness, which he felt were

unrelated to her work injury. Despite her concerns, he returned her to work at light duty.

In October, Ms. Perry saw Dr. Helms for the last time. She complained of low

back pain with numbness and tingling in both legs. On exam, Dr. Helms noted give-way

weakness in all muscle groups and "patchy" numbness in both legs. He felt her exam

was "completely unreliable." He noted he had nothing more to offer for Ms. Perry's

complaints, and he released her without restrictions with a two-percent impairment

rating. However, he ended the record by stating he would "see her back p.r.n."

On February 6, 2018, Ms. Perry settled her workers' compensation claim for her

impairment rating and open medical benefits for her thoracic and lumbar injuries. The

agreement named Dr. Helms as the authorized physician. In March, Ms. Perry filed a

Petition for Benefit Determination seeking additional medical benefits, specifically, a

panel of neurosurgeons to replace Dr. Helms. OSRC initially refused another panel. Ms.

Perry then sought treatment on her own, including multiple chiropractor visits and "cold

laser" treatments recommended by the chiropractor. Following mediation in August,

OSRC agreed to allow Ms. Perry to choose another authorized physician from a panel

comprised of the original panel plus a replacement for Dr. Helms. Ms. Perry declined.

Before the hearing, OSRC filed a motion to dismiss Ms. Perry's PBD on the

grounds that it offered a valid panel to replace Dr. Helms, but she refused to choose

another neurosurgeon. Ms. Perry agreed to select a doctor from the panel, but she stated

she had incurred significant unauthorized medical expenses before the proffered panel for

which she wished to be reimbursed. Given that the PBD cited "medical benefits" as an

issue, the Court declined to grant OSRC's motion to dismiss.

At the hearing, Ms. Perry attempted to introduce a bill from her chiropractor

outlining her unauthorized medical expenses since March. The statement was not

accompanied by records signed by a physician, other than a few chiropractic

examinations, or an affidavit from a records custodian. The only record potentially

addressing whether the treatment provided related to Ms. Perry's work-related injuries

was a note from a chiropractic therapy assistant. Finally, the records provided no medical

opinion as to the reasonableness and necessity of Ms. Perry's unauthorized treatment.

OSRC objected to the admission of these records on the grounds that they constituted

hearsay and lacked authentication. The Court upheld the objection, with the exception of

the chiropractic examinations, and excluded the records from evidence.

Ms. Perry testified that she did not return to Dr. Helms for several reasons. She

2

claimed that at her second to last visit, he seemed skeptical of her complaints and

dismissive as to her limitations. When she attempted to bend down to show her range of

motion, he pushed the back of her head, causing increased pain in her low back. She

returned in October with her husband, but he was not allowed in the examining room

with her. She said that Dr. Helms remained brusque and skeptical. He told her there was

nothing more he could do for her. Thus, even though she knew she could "return p.r.n,"

she did not see the point. Ms. Perry admitted that she never attempted to return to Dr.

Helms following the October 2017 visit. She also admitted that she knew at the time of

her settlement that the agreement named Dr. Helms as her authorized physician. She

testified that she did not choose a doctor from the panel provided in August because it

only replaced Dr. Helms and did not constitute an entirely new panel.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

Ms. Perry need not prove every element of her claim by a preponderance of the

evidence to obtain relief at an expedited hearing. Instead, she must present sufficient

evidence that she is likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits. See Tenn. Code Ann. §

50-6-239(d)(l) (2017); McCord v. Advantage Human Resourcing, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp.

App. Bd. LEXIS 6, at *7-8, 9 (Mar. 27, 2015).

The primary issue is whether Ms. Perry is entitled to reimbursement for

unauthorized expenses for treatment of her lumbar and thoracic spine injuries. The

parties agreed on February 6, 2018, that Dr. Helms would be Ms. Perry's authorized

physician. Ms. Perry admitted that she did not seek additional treatment with Dr. Helms

after this agreement but instead underwent unauthorized care. However, she argued that

she was entitled to seek this treatment given Dr. Helms' skeptical, dismissive attitude.

Whether an employee is justified in obtaining unauthorized medical treatment and

then requiring reimbursement for the cost of this treatment depends upon the

circumstances. Hackney v. Integrity Staffing Solutions, 2016 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd.

LEXIS 29, at *8-9 (July 22, 2016). Here, the Court finds that the circumstances did not

justify Ms. Perry's unauthorized treatment.

Before an employee may seek unauthorized treatment, the employer must first be

given an opportunity to determine whether the proposed treatment is reasonable and

necessary for the work injury. !d. Although Dr. Helms was skeptical of Ms. Perry's

symptoms, and he stated he had nothing further to offer, he qualified this statement by

indicating he "would see her p.r.n." By refusing to even attempt to see Dr. Helms again,

Ms. Perry did not give either him or OSRC the opportunity to provide additional

authorized treatment.

The Court acknowledges that Ms. Perry felt Dr. Helms marginalized her

complaints and questioned her credibility during his course of treatment; however, those

3

feelings alone do not justify transferring her care to another doctor without an attempt to

return to Dr. Helms. See Baker v. Electro lux, 2017 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 65,

at *8-9 (Oct. 20, 2017) (employee's dissatisfaction with authorized doctor's care not

enough to require the employer to authorize treatment with another physician).

In addition, OSRC attempted to settle the matter in August by offering to replace

Dr. Helms on the original panel and to allow Ms. Perry to select another treating

physician. he Court finds the new panel is in compliance with Tennessee Code

Annotated section 50-6-204(3)(0), but Ms. Perry declined to choose a new physician.'

Thus, even if Ms. Perry were correct in her assertion that she was reasonable in believing

Dr. Helms would no longer treat her, OSRC remedied that issue with the August panel.

Finally, Ms. Perry argued that, even if the August panel were valid, she was still

entitled to the unauthorized expenses she incurred after she filed the Petition for Benefit

Determination in March until OSRC offered the panel in August. However, even

assuming that she was justified in seeking unauthorized treatment during this timeframe,

she still must prove the expenses were reasonable, necessary and causally-related to her

work injury. Ms. Perry did not offer any doctors' opinions to meet these requirements.

Thus, the records admitted into evidence were insufficient to satisfy her burden even if

she was justified in seeking treatment from someone other than Dr. Helms.

Therefore, Ms. Perry's requests for reimbursement of unauthorized expenses and

an additional panel are denied at this time. Given that this matter arose following

settlement of the claim, there is no need to set a Scheduling Hearing.

ENTERED JANUARY 2, 2018.

~udgOCourt of Workers' Compensation Claims

1

At the hearing, OSRC agreed that its offer to allow Ms. Perry to choose another doctor from the revised

panel remains in effect.

4

APPENDIX

Technical Record

1. Petition for Benefit Determination

2. Dispute Certification Notice

3. Request for Expedited Hearing

4. Employer's Motion to Dismiss

5. Order Denying Motion to Dismiss

6. Transfer Order

7. Employer's Motion in Limine

8. Employer's Expedited Hearing Brief

9. Employer's Witness and Exhibit List

Exhibits

1. Settlement Agreement with Approval Order

2. Ms. Perry's affidavit

3. Choice of Physician Form

4. Medical records from Dr. Breeding

5. Medical records from Dr. Helms

6. Mary Chambers' affidavit

7. Chiropractic records from Dr. Wingate

8. Letter from Cindy Eller, CTA and attached medical bill summary (for I.D. only)

9. Medical bill outlining amount due (for I.D. only).

5

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 January 2, 20 19.

Name Certified Email Service sent to:

Mail

Amanda Perry X X Alwavscleanin .ao(a2gmai l.com

David Goudie X dgoudie@ morganakins.com

--~--~-1------------------------

Penny S 1":' m, Court Clerk

Court of Workers' Compensation Claims

6

Expedited Hearing Order Right to Appeal:

If you disagree with this Expedited Hearing Order, you may appeal to the Workers’

Compensation Appeals Board. To appeal an expedited hearing order, you must:

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

form with the Clerk of the Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims within seven

business days of the date the expedited hearing order was filed. When filing the Notice

of Appeal, you must serve a copy upon all parties.

2. You must pay, via check, money order, or credit card, a $75.00 filing fee within ten

calendar days after filing of the Notice of Appeal. Payments can be made in-person at

any Bureau office or by U.S. mail, hand-delivery, or other delivery service. In the

alternative, you may file an Affidavit of Indigency (form available on the Bureau’s

website or any Bureau office) seeking a waiver of the fee. You must file the fully-

completed Affidavit of Indigency within ten calendar days of filing the Notice of

Appeal. Failure to timely pay the filing fee or file the Affidavit of Indigency will

result in dismissal of the appeal.

3. You bear the responsibility of ensuring a complete record on appeal. You may request

from the court clerk the audio recording of the hearing for a $25.00 fee. If a transcript of

the proceedings is to be filed, a licensed court reporter must prepare the transcript and file

it with the court clerk within ten business days of the filing the Notice of

Appeal. Alternatively, you may file a statement of the evidence prepared jointly by both

parties within ten business days of the filing of the Notice of Appeal. The statement of

the evidence must convey a complete and accurate account of the hearing. The Workers’

Compensation Judge must approve the statement before the record is submitted to the

Appeals Board. If the Appeals Board is called upon to review testimony or other proof

concerning factual matters, the absence of a transcript or statement of the evidence can be

a significant obstacle to meaningful appellate review.

4. If you wish to file a position statement, you must file it with the court clerk within ten

business days after the deadline to file a transcript or statement of the evidence. The

party opposing the appeal may file a response with the court clerk within ten business

days after you file your position statement. All position statements should include: (1) a

statement summarizing the facts of the case from the evidence admitted during the

expedited hearing; (2) a statement summarizing the disposition of the case as a result of

the expedited hearing; (3) a statement of the issue(s) presented for review; and (4) an

argument, citing appropriate statutes, case law, or other authority.

For self-represented litigants: Help from an Ombudsman is available at 800-332-2667.

.

ll .I

Tennessee Bureau of Workers' Compensation

220 French Landing Drive, 1-B

Nashville, TN 37243-1002

800-332-2667

AFFIDAVIT OF INDIGENCY

I, , having been duly sworn according to law, make oath that

because of my poverty, I am unable to bear the costs of this appeal and request that the filing fee to appeal be

waived. The following facts support my poverty.

1. Full Name:_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 2. Address: - - - - - - - - - - - - -

3. Telephone Number: - - - - - - - - - 4. Date of Birth: - - - - - - - - - - -

5. Names and Ages of All Dependents:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Relationship: - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Relationship: - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - Relationship: - - - - - - - - - - - --

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Relationship: - - - - - - - - - - - - -

6. I am employed by: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , -

My employer's address is: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

My employer's phone number is: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

7. My present monthly household income, after federal income and social security taxes are deducted, is:

$ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___

8. I receive or expect to receive money from the following sources:

AFDC $ per month beginning

SSI $ per month beginning

Retirement $ per month beginning

Disability $ per month beginning

Unemployment $ per month beginning

Worker's Camp.$ per month beginning

Other $ per month beginning

LB-1108 (REV 11/15) RDA 11082

9. My expenses are: ' ; !•

'

Rent/House Payment $ per month Medical/Dental $ per month

Groceries $ per month Telephone $ per month

Electricity $ per month School Supplies $ per month

Water $ per month Clothing $ per month

Gas $ per month Child Care $ per month

Transportation $ per month Child Support $ per month

Car $ per month

Other $ per month (describe:

10. Assets:

Automobile $ _ _ __ _

(FMV) - - - - - -- - - -

Checking/Savings Acct. $ _ _ _ __

House $ _ _ _ __

(FMV) - - -- - - -- - -

)

Other $ _ _ _ __ Describe:_ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __

11. My debts are:

Amount Owed To Whom

I hereby declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing answers are true, correct, and complete

and that I am financially unable to pay the costs of this appeal.

APPELLANT

Sworn and subscribed before me, a notary public, this

_ _ _ dayof _____________ ,20____

NOTARY PUBLIC

My Commission Expires:_ _ _ _ _ __ _

LB-1108 (REV 11/15) RDA 11082

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.