Opinion

Howard, Lillian v. NHC Healthcare/Pulaski, LLC

  • 2019 TN WC 60
Court
Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
Filed
Apr 18, 2019
Status
Published
On the bench
Dale Tipps
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 12.5%

The opinion

FILED

Apr 18, 2019

08:23 AM(CT)

TENNESSEE COURT OF

WORKERS' COMPENSATION

CLAIMS

TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION

IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS

AT MURFREESBORO

LILLIAN HOWARD, ) Docket No. 2018-05-0841

Employee, )

v. )

)

NHC HEALTHCARE/PULASKI, LLC, ) State File No. 60684-2018

Employer, )

And )

)

PREMIER GROUP INS. CO., ) Judge Dale Tipps

Carrier. )

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER DENYING REQUESTED BENEFITS

This matter came before the Court on April 10, 2019, for an Expedited Hearing on

Ms. Howard’s entitlement to medical and temporary disability benefits. The central

issues are whether she is likely to establish at a hearing on the merits that she gave proper

notice and, if not, whether her injury arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of

her employment. For the reasons below, the Court holds Ms. Howard provided adequate

notice but is not entitled to the requested benefits at this time.

History of Claim

Ms. Howard suffered a back injury while working for another employer in 2015.

That employer accepted the claim as compensable and provided treatment with Dr.

Robert Clendenin. This Court approved the parties’ settlement of the claim in May 2017,

with Dr. Clendenin designated as the authorized physician for future treatment. Ms.

Howard was unable to return to her job and eventually began working for NHC at the end

of October 2017.

Ms. Howard testified that she felt something happen to her back while taking a

1

load of laundry out of the washing machine at work on February 2, 2018. 1 She finished

her shift and went to the office of her supervisor, Chasity Jones, to report the incident.

She could not locate Ms. Jones, so she clocked out and went home. When Ms. Howard’s

husband learned she was suffering from back pain, he advised her to report the injury, so

she called Ms. Jones at work and told her what had happened. Ms. Jones told Ms.

Howard to keep her informed.

The next day was Saturday, and Ms. Howard traveled to Huntsville with her

family for some shopping. When they arrived at the mall, she began having difficulty

walking due to back pain. She cut the trip short and returned home. Her pain worsened

to the point that she had to go to the emergency room on Sunday. She returned to the

emergency room on Monday.

On Tuesday, Ms. Howard went to her primary care doctor because the medicines

and injections from the emergency room were ineffective. His treatment provided no

relief either. Ms. Howard had a follow-up appointment scheduled with Dr. Clendenin

under her previous workers’ compensation claim, and she called to see if that

appointment could be moved up. She could not get her appointment changed, so she saw

Dr. Clendenin on February 27.

Following that appointment with Dr. Clendenin, Ms. Howard called an

administrator at NHC, who said that her claim was denied. Beginning with her first

emergency room visit, Ms. Howard’s doctors assigned temporary restrictions or took her

completely off work, and she has not worked for NHC or any other employer since

February 2, 2018.

On cross-examination, Ms. Howard admitted that she described her injury in the

Petition for Benefit Determination (PBD) as occurring over a period of five months of

“pulling, tugging and lifting wet laundry.” She explained that the PBD was incorrect and

that she sent it in by error.

Ms. Jones testified that Ms. Howard reported hurting her back at home in

December 2017, which caused her to miss work. She denied receiving any notice of a

work injury on February 2, 2018, although Ms. Howard left a voicemail that she would

be out of work on February 5 because of her back. Ms. Jones said Ms. Howard did not

report a specific work injury until the last week of February. At that time, Ms. Howard

was unable to identify a specific date or incident.

Records from Dr. Clendenin show that Ms. Howard saw him on February 27 for

follow-up of her previous work injury. He noted that he had not seen her since the

1

There was some confusion as to the exact date, but Ms. Howard said she was sure it was the first Friday

in February, which the Court notes was February 2.

2

previous April. Ms. Howard “was doing well until about the second of this month when

she was shopping and developed acute onset of severe pain in her back and leg.” She

reported severe pain. Dr. Clendenin assessed possible acute right lumbar radiculopathy

with a significant possibility of a new disc herniation.

On March 1, Ms. Howard returned to Dr. Clendenin after her MRI. He noted a

new right paracentral protrusion at L5-S1. At the next visit, Dr. Clendenin noted that Ms.

Howard was much better after an epidural injection. He recommended either another

injection or a surgical referral.

Ms. Howard had the injection and returned to Dr. Clendenin’s office on May 30,

where she saw Mary Feulner, a nurse practitioner. Ms. Howard, who was using a

wheelchair, reported significant back and right leg pain. NP Feulner noted, “She is

wondering if her symptoms are from an injury she had in January.” After a third epidural

injection, Ms. Howard saw Dr. Clendenin on July 10 and reported significant

improvement in her pain. He told her she could seek a second opinion with a back

surgeon if she wished, and he encouraged her to find a lighter job.

At the hearing, Ms. Howard requested that the Court order NHC to provide

additional medical treatment. Her PBD also included requests for temporary disability

benefits.

NHC contended that Ms. Howard’s claim is barred by her failure to provide proper

notice of an injury. It also argued that, even if notice were legally adequate, Ms. Howard

failed to prove she is likely to establish that she suffered an injury by accident arising

primarily out of and in the course and scope of her employment. For these reasons, it

asked the Court to deny her request.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

Standard applied

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

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

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

Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(1) (2018); McCord v. Advantage Human Resourcing, 2015 TN Wrk.

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

Notice

Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-201(a)(1) provides that an injured

employee must give written notice of an injury within fifteen days unless it can be shown

that the employer had actual knowledge of the accident or that “reasonable excuse for

3

failure to give the notice is made to the satisfaction of the tribunal.” The parties dispute

whether Ms. Howard actually gave NHC notice of her alleged February 2, 2018 injury.

The answer to this question lies in the C20 First Report of Injury filed by NHC.

Contrary to Ms. Jones’s testimony, the First Report states that NCS received notice of the

injury on February 5, only three days after the alleged injury date.

Further, Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-201(a)(3) provides that failure to

give notice will not bar a claim unless the employer can show it was prejudiced by the

lack of notice. Prejudice may be found if the employer is denied the opportunity to make

an investigation while the facts are accessible or to provide timely and proper treatment

for the injured employee. See Masters v. Industrial Garments Mfg. Co., 595 S.W.2d 811,

815 (Tenn. 1980). NHC presented no evidence of any prejudice to its ability to defend

this claim or provide proper medical treatment.

For these reasons, the Court holds that Ms. Howard is likely to prevail at a hearing

on the merits on the issue of notice.

Compensability

To prove a compensable injury, Ms. Howard must show that her alleged injuries

arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of her employment. This includes the

requirement that she must establish a work-related incident, or specific set of incidents,

identifiable by time and place of occurrence. Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-102(14)(A).

Regarding the requirement to identify a work-related incident, the PBD Ms.

Howard completed and signed did not describe a specific incident. Instead, she wrote

that her injury occurred over the course of several months. The First Report of Injury

states that she was unable to describe what happened or when. Further, the only medical

records introduced do not support her contention that she suffered a discrete, identifiable

injury on February 2, 2019, as they do not mention an injury until her fourth visit, four

months later. Even then, nothing indicates that the injury occurred at work. Under these

circumstances, the Court cannot find at this time that Ms. Howard is likely prove the

existence of the “work-related incident” required by section 50-6-102(14)(A).2

Even if Ms. Howard were to establish an identifiable injury, she would have to

show, “to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that it contributed more than fifty

percent (50%) in causing the . . . disablement or need for medical treatment, considering

2

The definition of “injury” in Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-102(14) includes cumulative

trauma or repetitive motion conditions. However, Ms. Howard claimed in her affidavit and insisted at the

hearing that she was seeking benefits for a specific February 2 injury. Further, she explicitly disavowed

the allegations in her PBD and denied a gradual injury. Based on that testimony, the Court cannot find

she would likely prevail on a claim for a cumulative trauma injury.

4

all causes.” “Shown to a reasonable degree of medical certainty” means that, “in the

opinion of the treating physician, it is more likely than not considering all causes as

opposed to speculation or possibility.” See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-102(14).

The only medical records introduced at the hearing were those of Dr. Clendenin,

who did not address causation. Thus, Ms. Howard offered no evidence that her work

contributed more than fifty percent in causing her need for medical treatment.

Ms. Howard appeared sincere in her belief that her work activities caused her

condition. However, the Court must abide by the causation requirements of the Workers’

Compensation Law and cannot infer from the mere existence of Ms. Howard’s back

condition that her employment caused it. The Court thus finds she is unlikely to prove at

this time that her condition arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of her

employment.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows:

1. Ms. Howard’s claim against NHC Healthcare and its workers’ compensation

carrier for the requested medical benefits is denied at this time.

2. This matter is set for a Scheduling Hearing on June 18, 2019, at 9:00 a.m. Please

call toll-free at 855-874-0473 to participate. Failure to call or appear may result in

a determination of the issues without your further participation. All conferences

are set using Central Time (CT).

ENTERED this the 18th day of April, 2019.

_____________________________________

Judge Dale Tipps

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

5

APPENDIX

Exhibits:

1. Affidavit of Lillian Howard

2. First Report of Injury

3. Notice of Denial of Claim

4. Physician Return-to-Work certificates

5. Imaging Reports

6. Medical Records

7. Settlement documents from previous workers’ compensation claim

8. December 12, 2017 treatment note (Identification Only)

9. Wage Statement

Technical record:

1. Petition for Benefit Determination

2. Dispute Certification Notice

3. Request for Expedited Hearing

4. NHC’s Response in Opposition to Request for Expedited Hearing

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 18th day

of April, 2019.

Name Certified Fax Email Service sent to:

Mail

Lillian Howard, X Lilhoward9894@gmail.com

Employee

Frank Gallina, X fgallina@plcslaw.com

Employer’s Attorney

_____________________________________

Penny Shrum, Clerk of Court

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

WC.CourtClerk@tn.gov

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.