Opinion

Larry, De'Breshia v. Cash America Int'l

  • 2019 TN WC 59
Court
Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
Filed
Apr 18, 2019
Status
Published
On the bench
Deana C. Seymour
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 12.5%

The opinion

FILED

Apr 18, 2019

11:51 AM(CT)

TENNESSEE COURT OF

WORKERS' COMPENSATION

CLAIMS

TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION

IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS

AT MEMPHIS

DE’BRESHIA LARRY, )

Employee, ) Docket No. 2018-08-0945

v. )

CASH AMERICA INT’L, )

Employer, )

And ) State File No. 63568-2017

TRAVELERS INDEMNITY CO., )

Carrier, )

and )

SUBSEQUENT INJURY AND ) Judge Deana Seymour

VOCATIONAL RECOVERY FUND. )

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER

This case came before the Court on March 25, 2019, for an Expedited Hearing.

The central issue is whether De’breshia Larry’s right-knee injury is idiopathic or work-

related. For the reasons below, the Court holds the injury is work-related and she is

entitled to medical benefits.

History of Claim

Ms. Larry claimed she injured her right knee at work on August 21, 2017. She

immediately notified Cash America International of her injury and went to the emergency

room. The emergency room records indicated that Ms. Larry presented with sudden right-

knee pain that started just before her arrival. She was diagnosed and treated for a lateral

dislocation of her patella, which the note mentioned she experienced several times as a

child.

The parties agreed on very little about the events of August 21. Both agreed that

Ms. Larry’s right knee dislocated while she was behind the counter at work, but they

1

vehemently contested the details surrounding her injury.

Ms. Larry testified that when she turned to help a customer, part of her right foot

landed on the edge of a safety mat and part landed on the floor. She felt a pop in her right

knee and almost fell. Her co-worker, Damien Coleman, caught her and laid her on the

counter. Another co-worker drove her to the emergency room.

Cash America relied on the live testimony of Aquavia Means and the affidavits of

Mr. Coleman and Schuyler Crowe. Ms. Means testified that she witnessed Ms. Larry’s

injury and prepared an incident report. According to Ms. Means, Ms. Larry did not turn

or twist before her knee dislocated. Instead, she took two steps and fell. Ms. Means

testified that Ms. Larry was not near the safety mat when she fell, and she denied that any

customers were in the store.

Mr. Coleman’s affidavit testimony supported Ms. Means’ version of events. He

also testified that Ms. Larry never told him she injured her knee while twisting or turning.

Ms. Crowe testified by affidavit that she notified Ms. Larry her claim was denied

because no workplace hazard caused her condition. She sent Ms. Larry the Notice of

Denial on August 23.

After learning that Cash America denied her claim, Ms. Larry treated on her own

with Dr. Nahum Beard and Dr. Anthony Mascioli at Campbell Clinic. Ms. Larry advised

Dr. Beard that she dislocated her knee when she shifted her weight to her right leg and

her kneecap popped out to the side. She indicated that her knee had never done this

before, but she mentioned having “mechanical symptoms” as a child. She told Dr.

Mascioli she was standing at work, twisted, and her knee gave out. She denied any

previous history of knee instability.

Dr. Beard diagnosed Ms. Larry with a patellar dislocation and possible underlying

dysplasia that might have predisposed her to the dislocation. He placed her in a brace,

ordered an MRI, and referred her to Dr. Mascioli to discuss further options. Dr. Mascioli

planned to treat Ms. Larry conservatively. However, Ms. Larry decided to change and

began treating with Dr. Richard Ennis.

Ms. Larry advised Dr. Ennis that she injured her right knee when she turned

suddenly and felt a pop in her knee. According to Dr. Ennis’ office note, Ms. Larry had

experienced two additional dislocations since that time. Dr. Ennis initially recommended

conservative treatment but ultimately referred Ms. Larry to Dr. Robert Bobo to consider

surgery. After examining Ms. Larry’s knee and reviewing her MRI report, Dr. Bobo

noted the findings were “not extremely strong for surgical treatment.” He injected her

knee, referred her to physical therapy, and prescribed medication.

2

When she did not improve, Dr. Bobo referred her to Dr. Michael Hood. In an

April 6, 2018 office note, Dr. Hood observed “gross instability with lateral patella

instability” in the right knee despite “exhaustive conservative management” over an

eight-month period. He recommended a medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction

and indicated that her work incident was 100% responsible for her current condition. He

specifically indicated that Ms. Larry had no preexisting patellofemoral dysplasia and

there was “no reason to believe this was a congenital problem.”

On October 19, Ms. Larry filed a Petition for Benefit Determination (PBD)

seeking medical and temporary disability benefits as well as attorneys’ fees. At the time

of the Expedited Hearing, Ms. Larry continued to have problems with her right knee and

insisted she needed the recommended surgery. She also continued to work for Cash

America and received a promotion to assistant store manager. She testified that she had

no hospitalizations, health conditions, or restrictions before her work injury.

Cash America argued that Ms. Larry changed her version of events several times

during the course of her claim. It pointed to the histories Ms. Larry gave to her medical

providers, the description of her injury in her PBD, and her testimony about the incident

in her affidavit. Cash America also referenced portions of Ms. Larry’s medical records

where providers mentioned previous problems with her right knee as a child. Further, it

pointed out that none of Ms. Larry’s providers took her off work during her treatment.

The Subsequent Injury and Vocational Recovery Fund (SIF) moved to be

dismissed as Ms. Larry continued to work and did not suffer from a permanent and pre-

existing disabling condition before the alleged injury. The Court took the motion under

advisement. The Court finds this motion premature. An Expedited Hearing is

interlocutory in nature and not for final decisions. However, the SIF may file a written

motion for relief. The present motion is denied.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

Standard Applied

At an Expedited Hearing, Ms. Larry need not prove every element of her claim by

a preponderance of the evidence but must come forward with sufficient evidence from

which the trial court can determine that she is likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits.

McCord v. Advantage Human Resourcing, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 6, at

*7-8, 9 (Mar. 27, 2015). This lesser evidentiary standard does not relieve Ms. Larry of the

burden to produce evidence of an injury by accident that arose primarily out of and in the

course and scope of employment, but “allows some relief to be granted if that evidence

does not rise to the level of a ‘preponderance of the evidence.’” Buchanan v. Carlex

Glass Co., 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 39, at *6 (Sept. 29, 2015).

3

Idiopathic Injury

Turning to the central issue of this case, the Court must first determine whether

Ms. Larry sustained an idiopathic right-knee injury. An idiopathic injury is one that “has

an unexplained origin or cause, and generally does not arise out of the employment.”

McCaffery v. Cardinal Logistics, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 50, at *9 (Dec.

10, 2015). If an employment hazard causes or exacerbates an injury that occurs due to an

idiopathic condition, however, the injury is compensable. See id. at *10. Cause in this

context means “the accident originated in the hazards to which the employee was

exposed as a result of performing his job duties,” and the Court must focus on the causal

link between the employment and the accident or injury not the employment and the

idiopathic episode. Id. at *10-11.

Ms. Larry testified that when she turned to help a customer, her right foot planted

on the edge of the safety mat so that part of her foot landed on the mat and part landed on

the floor. She felt a pop in her right knee and almost fell. She testified similarly in her

affidavit. In her PBD, Ms. Larry did not mention the safety mat, but she described

twisting and hurting her knee at work. She provided a similar history to Dr. Mascioli and

told Dr. Ennis that she “turned suddenly” and felt a pop in her knee.

The Court recognizes that credibility is an integral issue in this case and

appreciates the concerns Cash America raised regarding Ms. Larry’s version of events.

The Court acknowledges that she gave somewhat inconsistent histories to the doctors.

She also had trouble recalling who witnessed her injury and where she received

emergency care. However, “[e]ven if minor and insignificant details vary, an injured

worker should not be penalized simply for being a poor historian.” Orman v. Williams

Sonoma, Inc., 803 S.W.2d 672, 677 (Tenn. 1991). While Ms. Larry might not be a good

historian, she made a credible witness. She testified calmly and confidently and was

reasonable and forthcoming. See Kelly v. Kelly, 445 S.W.3d 685, 694-5 (Tenn. 2014).

The Court also recognizes that witnesses to the incident do not recall Ms. Larry

turning or twisting when the injury occurred. However, in light of Ms. Larry’s testimony

and the photographs introduced of the counter area and safety mat, the Court finds her

version of events more convincing. The photographs show that the safety mat spans the

entire length of the counter, so if she was standing behind the counter, as everyone has

indicated, she would be on or near the safety mat.

The irony of finding that a “safety mat” posed a hazard does not escape the Court,

but in this case, the evidence leads to this very conclusion. Therefore, based on the

foregoing, the Court holds that Ms. Larry is likely to succeed at a hearing on the merits in

proving she did not sustain an idiopathic injury.

4

Arising Primarily Out of Employment

The Court further holds that Ms. Larry is likely to succeed at a hearing on the

merits in proving her condition arose primarily out of her employment. An injury “arises

primarily out of and in the course and scope of employment” only if it has been shown by

a preponderance of the evidence that the employment contributed “more than fifty

percent (50%) in causing the injury, considering all causes.” Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-

102(14)(B). Medical evidence is generally required to establish a causal relationship,

except in the most “obvious, simple [or] routine cases.” Berdnik v. Fairfield Glade Cmty.

Club, 2017 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 32, at *10-11 (May 18, 2017).

Ms. Larry introduced Dr. Hood’s April 27, 2018 opinion indicating that her work

incident was 100% responsible for her current medical condition. Cash America did not

introduce any medical proof to contradict this opinion. Instead, it pointed to medical

records that mentioned prior problems with her knee during childhood and noted possible

underlying dysplasia that predisposed her to a patellar dislocation. However, Ms. Larry

denied telling her medical providers that she had problems with her knee as a child.

Moreover, Dr. Hood specifically stated that Ms. Larry had no preexisting patellofemoral

dysplasia and stated there was “no reason to believe this was a congenital problem.”

Based on this evidence, the Court holds that Ms. Larry is likely to prevail at a hearing on

the merits on this issue.

Medical Benefits

Since Ms. Larry showed a likelihood of success in proving that her injury arose

primarily out of her employment, Cash America is required to provide reasonable and

necessary medical treatment for her work injury. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-

204(a)(1)(A). Cash America denied Ms. Larry’s claim two days after her injury and never

provided medical benefits or a panel of physicians. If an employer fails to provide a

panel, it risks having to pay for all reasonable and necessary medical expenses incurred

by an employee for treatment with an unauthorized physician and also risks having to

provide continuing care with the unauthorized physician. See Young v. Young Elec., 2016

TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 24, at *16 (May 25, 2016).

While Ms. Larry provided no proof of the expenses incurred for her unauthorized

treatment, the Court designates Dr. Hood as Ms. Larry’s authorized treating physician for

ongoing treatment. Ms. Larry specifically asked the Court to order the surgery

recommended by Dr. Hood. However, Dr. Hood made his surgical recommendation over

a year ago, and his treatment plan might have changed. Therefore, the Court orders Cash

America to provide Ms. Larry with all reasonable and necessary medical treatment

recommended by Dr. Hood for her work injury.

5

Temporary Disability Benefits

To receive temporary total disability benefits, Ms. Larry must show (1) total

disability from working as the result of a compensable injury; (2) a causal connection

between the injury and the inability to work; and (3) the duration of the period of

disability. Shepherd v. Haren Constr. Co., Inc., 2016 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS

15, at *13 (Mar. 30, 2016).

The medical records do not show that Ms. Larry’s medical providers took her off

work or placed her on restricted duty as a result of her knee injury. Ms. Larry admitted

that her doctors never took her off work. Therefore, she is not entitled to temporary

disability benefits at this time.

Attorneys’ Fees

Ms. Larry’s counsel requests attorneys’ fees under Tennessee Code Annotated

section 50-6-226(d)(1)(B). This statute does not set a time for attorneys’ fee awards, but

the Appeals Board stated:

Given the uncertainties inherent in litigation, the limited issues typically

addressed at expedited hearings, the fact that discovery and medical proof

often are incomplete at an interlocutory stage of a case, the standard of

proof that applies at expedited hearings, and the fact that a trial judge’s

determinations at an interlocutory hearing are subject to change at any time

prior to the entry of a final compensation hearing order, a decision to award

attorneys’ fees and expenses at an interlocutory stage of a case should be

made only in extremely limited circumstances.

Thompson v. Comcast Corp., 2018 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 1, at *28-29 (Jan.

30, 2018). The Court holds this case does not fall within “extremely limited

circumstances” to justify an award of attorneys’ fees at this interlocutory stage. Thus, the

Court denies this request at this time.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows:

1. Cash America shall provide Ms. Larry with reasonable and necessary medical

treatment under Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-204. The Court

designates Dr. Michael Hood as Ms. Larry’s authorized treating physician for

ongoing treatment.

2. No temporary disability benefits are due at this time.

6

3. This matter is set for a Scheduling Hearing on June 3, 2019, at 11:00 a.m.

central time. You must call toll-free at 866-943-0014 to participate in the

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

participation.

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

with this Order must occur no later than seven business days from the date of entry

of this Order as required by Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-239(d)(3).

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 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. For questions regarding compliance, please

contact the Workers’ Compensation Compliance Unit by email at

WCCompliance.Program@tn.gov.

ENTERED April 18, 2019.

_____________________________________

JUDGE DEANA C. SEYMOUR

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

APPENDIX

Exhibits:

1. Medical records with Table of Contents (Collective)

2. Petition for Benefit Determination

3. Dispute Certification Notice

4. Request for Expedited Hearing, with Affidavit of De’Breshia Larry in Support of

Request for Expedited Hearing

5. Subsequent Injury and Vocational Recovery Fund’s Expedited Hearing Brief

6. Employer’s Witness List

7. Employer’s Exhibit List

7a. Photographs (Collective)

7b. Work-Related Injury/Illness Report

7c. Notice of Denial of Claim for Compensation

7d. Affidavit of Damien Coleman

7e. Signed statement of Marcus Taylor (For identification only)

7f. Affidavit of Schuyler Crowe

8. Employee’s Witness List

7

9. Employee’s Exhibit List, with attachments

10. Employer/Carrier’s Expedited Hearing Pre-Trial Brief, with attachments

11. Photograph of safety mat

12. Affidavit of Attorney Andrew L. Wener

Technical Record:

1. Petition for Benefit Determination

2. Dispute Certification Notice

3. Request for Expedited Hearing, with attached Affidavit of De’Breshia Larry in

Support of Request for Expedited Hearing

4. Subsequent Injury and Vocational Recovery Fund’s Expedited Hearing Brief

5. Employer’s Witness List

6. Employer’s Exhibit List, with attachments

7. Employee’s Motion in Limine

8. Employee’s Witness List

9. Employee’s Exhibit List, with attachments

10. Employer/Carrier’s Expedited Hearing Pre-Trial Brief, with attachments

11. Employee’s Second Motion in Limine

12. Employer/Carrier’s Response to Employee’s Motions in Limine

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of this Order was sent to these recipients by the following

methods of service on April 18, 2019.

Name Certified Fax Regular Email Sent to:

Mail mail

Andrew Wener, X awener@wenerlawfirm.com

Employee’s attorney

Paul Nicks, X pnicks@travelers.com

Employer’s attorney

Timothy Kellum, X timothy.kellum@tn.gov

SIF Attorney

_____________________________________

Penny Shrum, Court Clerk

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

WC.CourtClerk@tn.gov

8

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.