Opinion

Jennings, Charlotte v. Q-Mart Dyersburg, Inc.

  • 2018 TN WC 36
Court
Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
Filed
Mar 28, 2018
Status
Published
On the bench
Allen Phillips
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

FILED

Mar 28, 2018

03:10 PM(CT)

TENNESSEE COURT OF

CLAIMS

TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION

IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS

AT JACKSON

CHARLOTTE JENNINGS, ) Docket No. 2017-07-0696

Employee, )

Vv. )

Q-MART DYERSBURG, INC., ) State File No. 59502-2017

Employer, )

And )

ACADIA INS. CoO., ) Judge Allen Phillips

Carrier. )

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER FOR MEDICAL BENEFITS

Ms. Jennings requested a panel of physicians to evaluate an alleged cardiac injury

at Q-Mart. Q-Mart refused to provide a panel, contending that Ms. Jennings’ injury did

not arise out of her employment. The Court heard the dispute at an expedited hearing on

March 26, 2018, and holds Ms. Jennings is entitled to a panel of physicians.

History of Claim

Ms. Jennings presented her testimony by affidavit. On June 16, 2017, she was

working at Q-Mart when an armed assailant placed a gun to her head during a robbery.

She claims this incident caused her to suffer an acute myocardial infarction. Ms. Jennings

said Q-Mart refused to provide her with treatment “even though [she had] released her

medical records to them.”

Ms. Jennings sought treatment at Dyersburg Regional Hospital for chest pain after

being robbed at gunpoint. The discharge summary included a diagnosis of myocardial

infarction and instructions to follow-up with a cardiologist.

Q-Mart did not introduce evidence apart from medical records, from which it

contended that Ms. Jennings suffered cardiac issues prior to June 16. Specifically, it

pointed to medical records that indicated frequent episodes of chest pain due to anxiety,

shortness of breath, and hypertension. It also noted that the June 17 record from

1

WORKERS' COMPENSATION

Dyersburg Regional recorded a history that Ms. Jennings complained of chest pains two

to three days prior to the incident. Q-Mart also argued her past medical history included

diagnoses of diabetes, chronic lung disease and the previously noted chest pains and

hypertension. It argued a cardiologist said one month later that her coronary artery

disease was chronic in nature.

Based on the medical records, Q-Mart argued that the incident of June 16 did not

cause Ms. Jennings’ heart issues but rather they were pre-existing. Further, no physician

related her heart disease to her work or said that her condition arose primarily out of it.

Thus, Q-Mart maintained its denial because the evidence did not show to a reasonable

degree of medical certainty that her work contributed more than fifty percent in causing

her need for medical treatment.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

At this expedited hearing, Ms. Jennings must present sufficient evidence to

establish she would likely prevail at a hearing on the merits regarding her request for a

panel. Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(1) (2017). In McCord vy. Advantage Human

Resourcing, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 6 (Mar. 27, 2015), the Appeals

Board explained part of the reasoning for this relaxed burden is to prevent an employee

from having to “seek out, obtain, and pay for a medical evaluation or treatment before...

her employer would have any obligation to provide medical benefits.” Such a

requirement would be “inconsistent with a fair, expeditious, and efficient workers’

compensation system.” Jd. at *9-10.

The Court agrees with Q-Mart that Ms. Jennings does not have medical evidence

establishing that she suffered an injury arising primarily out of her employment.

However, the Appeals Board rejected this argument in McCord under the same

circumstances. In McCord, the uncontroverted evidence established the employee

reported a specific incident and requested medical evaluation. Jd. at *17. Ms. Jennings’

uncontroverted testimony is that she suffered a myocardial infarction after being robbed

at gunpoint and the hospital records confirm that incident, diagnosis, and referral to a

cardiologist. Under McCord, this Court holds Ms. Jennings has satisfied her burden at

this interlocutory stage to support an order compelling Q-Mart to provide a panel of

physicians for evaluation and possible treatment of her cardiac condition.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows:

1. Q-mart shall provide reasonable and necessary medical treatment under Tennessee

Code Annotated section 50-6-204(a)(1)(A) by providing Ms. Jennings a panel of

cardiologists, or other physicians competent to evaluate and treat cardiac injuries.

Ms. Jennings or the chosen physician shall provide the bills to Q-Mart.

2. This matter is set for a telephonic Status Hearing on Tuesday, June 26, 2018,

at 10:30 a.m. Central Time. The parties must call toll-free at 855-543-5038 to

participate in the hearing. Failure to call in may result in a determination of any

issues without a parties’ further participation.

Judge Allen Phillips V

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

APPENDIX

Exhibits:

1. Affidavit of Charlotte Jennings

2. Collective Medical Records of Dyer Co. Health Department, Tennova Healthcare-

Dyersburg and Dr. Norman Weinstein

3. First Report of Work Injury

4. Panel of psychiatric/psychological physicians

Technical record:

1. Petition for Benefit Determination

Dispute Certification Notice

Request for Expedited Hearing

Employer’s Response to Request for Expedited Hearing

Order on Medical Records

ot ee ee be

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

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

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

of March, 2018.

Name Via Email Service sent to:

Charles L. Holliday, Esq., x chuckh@garretylaw.com

Attorney for Employee XxX masher@garretylaw.com

Steve Snyder, Esq., x steve.snyder@mgclaw.com

Attorney for Employer

/ a 4 Mum

Penny Shrum, Clerk of Court

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

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.