Opinion

Nigmatyanov, Rashelle v. Lowe's Home Centers, Inc.

  • 2019 TN WC 123
Court
Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
Filed
Aug 9, 2019
Status
Published
On the bench
Joshua Davis Baker
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

FILED

Aug 09, 2019

02:41 PM(CT)

TENNESSEE COURT OF

WORKERS' COMPENSATION

CLAIMS

TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION

IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS

AT NASHVILLE

RASHELLE NIGMATYANOV, )

Employee, ) Docket No. 2018-06-2320

)

V. ) State File No. 67955-2018

)

LOWE’S HOME CENTERS, INC., ) Judge Joshua D. Baker

Employer. )

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER

The Court convened an expedited hearing on July 17, 2019, to consider whether

Ms. Nigmatyanov is entitled to medical and temporary disability benefits for her alleged,

work-related right-shoulder injury. For the reasons below, the Court finds she is likely to

prevail in proving entitlement to additional medical benefits. The Court denies her

request for temporary disability benefits at this time.!

Claim History

On September 4, 2018, Ms. Nigmatyanov alleged disabling pain in her right

shoulder from lifting heavy bags of mulch, rock, and soil for Lowe’s customers. She had

prior right shoulder problems, including a rotator cuff repair roughly ten years before and

a 2017 work injury at Lowe’s for which she treated with an orthopedic specialist.

When the 2018 accident occurred, Lowe’s prepared a First Report of Injury

indicating Ms. Nigmatyanov reported a lifting injury. Instead of providing a panel, she

testified Lowe’s directed her to Dr. Paul Niner because her treating physician from 2017

was unavailable.

' Ms. Nigmatyanov presented medical bills and records at the hearing. Lowe’s objected to their

admissibility due to the untimeliness of the submission. See Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. 0800-02-21-.14

(1)(a)-(c). The Court sustained the objection and admitted the documentation for identification purposes

only.

Dr. Niner documented that he suspected “an arthritic type process,” treated her

conservatively over a few weeks, and restricted her from pushing or pulling more than

fifteen pounds from September 14 until October 22. During her last visit, he maintained

her restrictions until a follow-up appointment on October 22.

Ms. Nigmatyanov did not see Dr. Niner again because Lowe’s denied her claim

based upon Dr. Niner’s causation responses to questionnaires. He initially suggested that

Ms. Nigmatyanov’s repetitive lifting at Lowe’s aggravated a pre-existing, degenerative

condition. When asked if her need for treatment was primarily related to increased pain

from the work accident, he responded under “Yes” by writing, “Possibly — But root cause

is likely degenerative and aggravated by repetitive movement.” Dr. Niner also stated,

“[R]epetitive work/movements and age could be an aggravating factor.”

Following Dr. Niner’s initial response, Lowe’s sent a second questionnaire, which

relayed the statutory definition of an injury as one where employment contributed more

than fifty percent to the injury considering all causes. When asked if the primary cause

of Ms. Nigmatyanov’s degenerative condition was her current work injury, former work

injury, or the rotator cuff repair, Dr. Niner responded that the primary cause of her

shoulder’s degeneration was “age, surgery.” He wrote, “It is most likely that her issues

are not a direct result of her job but only an aggravating factor due to lifting — repetitive

lifting will likely keep aggravating her prior issues.” Regarding restrictions, he wrote,

“Without further eval. from ortho — I will not be able to give an accurate assessment.”

Nearly a year later, Lowe’s sent Dr. Niner a third questionnaire asking if his

orthopedist referral was primarily related to the rotator cuff repair rather than to her work

at Lowe’s. He marked, “Yes.”

During this period, Ms. Nigmatyanov stated that Lowe’s refused her attempts to

work because she could not lift at least thirty-five pounds.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

To prevail at an expedited hearing, Ms. Nigmatyanov must provide sufficient

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

Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(1) (2018). Here she must prove she would likely prevail in proving

entitlement to additional medical benefits and temporary disability benefits. The Court

holds she presented sufficient evidence to prove entitlement to additional medical

benefits but failed to present sufficient evidence to support her claim for temporary

disability benefits.

The question of medical benefits concerns whether Ms. Nigmatyanov suffered a

workers’ compensation injury. Under the Workers’ Compensation Law, an “injury”

means “an injury by accident . . . arising primarily out of and in the course and scope of

2

employment, that causes death, disablement, or the need for medical treatment of the

employee[.]” The injury must be caused “by a specific incident, or set of incidents,

arising primarily out of and in the course and scope of employment.” “An injury arises

primarily out of and in the course and scope of employment, if “the employment

contributed more than fifty percent (50%) in causing the injury, considering all causes[.]”

An injury includes an aggravation of a preexisting condition if the aggravation arose

primarily out of and in the course and scope of employment. See Tenn. Code Ann. §50-

6-102(14).

Here, Ms. Nigmatyanov testified she hurt her shoulder while lifting heavy

landscape and gardening items for Lowe’s customers. She reported her injury as a new

one rather than a reoccurrence of her previous condition. Based on these facts, the Court

finds Ms. Nigmatyanov reported a specific incident or set of incidents that arose

primarily out of her employment.

When Ms. Nigmatyanov reported her injury, the Court finds that triggered Lowe’s

duty to provide a panel of physicians. Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. 0800-02-01-.25(1); see

also, Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-204(a)(3)(A) (“Upon notice of any workplace injury, other

than a minor injury for which no person could reasonably believe requires treatment from

a physician, the employer shall immediately provide the injured employee a panel of

physicians that meets the statutory requirements for treatment of the injury.”). Ms.

Nigmatyanov testified she never received a panel. Instead, Lowe’s directed her to Dr.

Niner. The Court holds that Lowe’s, by its action, prevented Ms. Nigmatyanov from

exercising her right to choose an authorized treating physician. The Court finds Lowe’s

action ran afoul of the rules governing provision of medical benefits and refers this claim

to the Compliance Program to consider imposition of penalties

As noted, although Lowe’s failed to provide Ms. Nigmatyanov a panel, it did pay

for treatment with Dr. Niner. As the only physician who treated her, the Court must

consider his opinion. Berdnik v. Fairfield Glade, 2017 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS

32, at *10 (May 18, 2017) (“While we acknowledge that this opinion was rendered by

Employer’s physician rather than an authorized physician chosen from a panel, it is,

nonetheless, the only medical opinion upon which we can rely[.]”). As explained further

below, however, the Court finds Dr. Niner’s opinion insufficient to determine medical

causation.

The usefulness of Dr. Niner’s opinion is limited both by the questions posed to

him and by the narrow slip of a foundation on which he based his opinion. His initial

response to Lowe’s was based on perhaps one physical exam and x-rays because Lowe’s

denied her claim. Further, Lowe’s relayed to him the statutory definition of an injury, not

an aggravation when requesting the opinion. In other words, he did not have the correct

legal standard for determining an aggravation of a preexisting condition.

Even so, Dr. Niner’s responses indicate that Ms. Nigmatyanov “possibly” suffered

an aggravation of a pre-existing condition. Unfortunately, as noted above, he did not

have a wealth of diagnostic information or the correct legal standard with which to

determine or explain by what degree her employment aggravated her condition.

Furthermore, Dr. Niner noted in his response to the initial causation letter from Lowe’s

that Ms. Nigmatyanov should see an orthopedic specialist.

While Dr. Niner’s opinion is too inexplicit to support a preponderance of the

evidence standard, the Court finds it corroborates and supports Ms. Nigmatyanov’s

account that lifting heavy bags at Lowe’s aggravated her right shoulder and caused

disabling pain. When coupled with her testimony, the Court finds Dr. Niner’s opinion is

sufficient to support her claim for additional medical treatment. The Court holds Lowe’s

must provide Ms. Nigmatyanov a panel of orthopedic physicians from which she shall

select one to serve as the authorized treating physician.

Next, the Court addresses Ms. Nigmatyanov’s claim for temporary disability

benefits. She is eligible for these benefits if: (1) she became disabled due to a work

injury; (2) a causal connection exists between her work injury and inability to work; and

(3) she proved the duration of her disability. Jones v. Crencor Leasing and Sales, 2015

TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 48, at *7 (Dec. 11, 2015). At this time, Ms.

Nigmatyanov’s claim for temporary disability benefits must fail because no physician has

definitively linked her condition to her work for Lowe’s.

It is ORDERED as follows:

1. Ms. Nigmatyanov’s claim for medical benefits is granted. Lowe’s shall offer a

panel of three orthopedists from which Ms. Nigmatyanov shall select a physician

for medical treatment.

2. The Court denies Ms. Nigmatyanov’s claim for temporary disability benefits at

this time.

3. This case is referred to the Compliance Program to consider imposition of

penalties against Lowe’s for its failure to provide a panel of physicians.

4. This matter is set for a scheduling hearing on Monday, September 23, 2019, at

3:00 p.m. (CDT). The parties must call 615-741-2113 to participate in the

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

party’s participation.

5. Unless interlocutory appeal of this 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).

4

The 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 Penalty Unit by email at

WCCompliance.Program@tn.gov.

ENTERED AUGUST 9, 2019.

st

Jéshna Davis Baker, Judge

ourt of Workers’ Compensation Claims

APPENDIX

Exhibits:

1.

ee eo ee

Medical Records, including questionnaire responses of Dr. Paul Niner dated

September 21 and October 16, 2018

Affidavit of Rashelle Nigmatyanov

Questionnaire Response of Dr. Paul Niner dated July 2, 2019

Wage Statement

First Report of Injury

Notice of Denial dated October 18, 2018

Medical Records from Northcrest Physician Services, Bills and Receipts, for

identification purposes only

Notice of Denial dated October 30, 2018

Technical Record:

1.

COON AARWY

Petition for Benefit Determination

Dispute Certification Notice

Request for Expedited Hearing

Employee’s Motion to Continue

Order Granting Continuance

Employer’s Motion to Continue

Order Granting Continuance

Employee’s Motion to Compel

Employer’s Exhibit List

10. Order Granting Motion to Compel

11.Employer’s Motion to Alter or Amend Order Compelling Discovery

12.Employee’s Exhibit List

13.Employee’s Response to Employer’s Motion to Alter or Amend Order

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of this Order was sent as indicated on August 9, 2019.

Name Certified | Fax | Email | Service sent to:

Mail

Rashelle Nigmatyanov, Xx Shelme2222@gmail.com

Employee

Carolina Martin, X Carolina.martin@leitnerfirm.com

Employer’s Attorney

Lire ll ae

Penlny Shrus, Court Clerk

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

WC.CourtClerk@tn.gov

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.

LB-1099

EXPEDITED HEARING NOTICE OF APPEAL

Tennessee Division of Workers’ Compensation

www. tn.gov/labor-wid/weomp.shtml

wce.courtclerk@tn.gov

1-800-332-2667

Docket #:

State File #/YR:

Employee

Vv.

Employer

Notice

Notice is given that

[List name(s) of all appealing party(ies) on separate sheet if necessary]

appeals the order(s) of the Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims at

to the Workers’ Compensation Appeals

Board. [List the date(s) the order(s) was filed in the court clerk’s office]

Judge

Statement of the Issues

Provide a short and plain statement of the issues on appeal or basis for relief on appeal:

Additional Information

Type of Case [Check the most appropriate item]

L] Temporary disability benefits

L] Medical benefits for current injury

LC Medical benefits under prior order issued by the Court

List of Parties

Appellant (Requesting Party): At Hearing: LJEmployer LJEmployee

Address:

Party’s Phone: Email:

Attorney's Name: BPR#:

Attorney’s Address: Phone:

Attorney's City, State & Zip code:

Attorney’s Email:

* Attach an additional sheet for each additional Appellant *

rev. 10/18 Page 1 of 2 RDA 11082

Employee Name: SF#: DOI:

Appellee(s)

Appellee (Opposing Party): At Hearing: L]JEmployer LJEmployee

Appellee’s Address:

Appellee’s Phone: Email:

Attorney’s Name: BPR#:

Attorney’s Address: Phone:

Attorney’s City, State & Zip code:

Attorney’s Email:

* Attach an additional sheet for each additional Appellee *

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I,

Expedited Hearing Notice of Appeal by First Class, United States Mail, postage prepaid, to all parties

and/or their attorneys in this case in accordance with Rule 0800-02-22.01(2) of the Tennessee Rules

of Board of Workers’ Compensation Appeals on this the day of , 20

, certify that | have forwarded a true and exact copy of this

[Signature of appellant or attorney for appellant]

LB-1099 rev. 10/18 Page 2 of 2 RDA 11082

Tennessee Bureau of Workers’ Compensation

220 French Landing Drive, I-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, | 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 Ail Dependents:

Relationship:

Relationship:

Relationship:

Relationship:

6. lam 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. | receive or expect to receive money from the following sources:

AFDC $ per month beginning

ssl $ per month beginning

Retirement $ per month beginning

Disability $ per month beginning

Unemployment $ per month beginning

Worker's Comp.$ per month beginning

Other $ per month beginning

LB-1108 (REV 11/15) RDA 11082

9. My expenses are:

Rent/House Payment $ permonth 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

| 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

day of , 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.