Opinion

Lowder, William v. XPO Logistics Freight, Inc.

  • 2019 TN WC 97
Court
Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
Filed
Jun 27, 2019
Status
Published
On the bench
Audrey Headrick
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 12.5%

The opinion

FILED

Jun 27, 2019

03:22 PM(ET)

TENNESSEE COURT OF

WORKERS' COMPENSATION

CLAIMS

TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION

IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS

AT CHATTANOOGA

William Lowder, ) Docket No.: 2019-01-0122

Employee, )

V. )

XPO Logistics Freight, Inc., ) State File No.: 11383-2019

Employer, )

And )

Indemnity Ins. Co. of N.A., ) Judge Audrey Headrick

Carrier. )

ORDER ASSESSING PENALTY

This came before the Court on its June 12, 2019, written request for XPO

Logistics to provide documentation as to why a civil penalty should not be assessed for

its alleged late payment of past temporary disability benefits to Mr. Lowder.' XPO

Logistics filed its response on May 23 and a supplemental response on June 20. For the

reasons below, the Court assesses a penalty against XPO Logistics under Tennessee Code

Annotated section 50-6-205(b)(3)(A) (2018).

History of Claim

Mr. Lowder, a driver for XPO Logistics, developed hernias on January 2, 2019,

when he delivered a shipment of solar panels to a customer. He received authorized

treatment and work restrictions. On February 13, Dr. Darren Hunt saw Mr. Lowder and

noted complaints of groin pain on both sides, a palpable hernia on the left, tenderness on

the right, and CT results revealing a left inguinal hernia and umbilical hernia. Dr. Hunt

' Mr. Lowder filed a May 14 Request for Expedited Hearing on the record. The Court issued a docketing

notice allowing the parties until June 21 to file objections or submit position statements. It also contained

a written request for XPO Logistics to provide documentation as to why a civil penalty should not be

assessed for its alleged late payment of temporary disability benefits to Mr. Lowder. See T.C.A. § 50-6-

205 (3) (B). XPO Logistics did not request an evidentiary hearing, and the Court determined it needed no

additional evidence to decide the issues. Since a Request for Expedited Hearing applies to requests for

medical and/or temporary disability benefits, the Court will treat the Request as a motion for penalties.

recommended surgery to repair the left-sided hernias and to explore the right-side given

Mr. Lowder’s complaints of pain. XPO Logistics denied the claim on February 19

asserting the hernia did not appear “immediately” following the January 2 accident as

required by the hernia statute. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-212.

As part of an ongoing mediation process, XPO Logistics accepted Mr. Lowder’s

claim. XPO Logistics did not accommodate Mr. Lowder’s restrictions on January 24 and

January 25 but did accommodate them from January 26 through April 26 at less than his

average weekly wage. On or about April 24, XPO Logistics issued a $4,394.82

temporary partial disability benefits check to Mr. Lowder for benefits that accrued from

January 24 through April 26.

Law and Analysis

Non-Payment or Late Payment of Temporary Disability Benefits

Mr. Lowder requested that the Court assess a twenty-five percent penalty for the

late payment of temporary disability benefits. The type of disability benefit paid to Mr.

Lowder was temporary partial disability benefits because he earned less than his average

weekly wage due to work restrictions. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-207(2)(A).

Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-205(b)(3) authorizes a workers’ compensation

judge to assess a twenty-five-percent penalty when “an employer, trust or pool or an

employer’s insurer fails to pay, or untimely pays, temporary disability benefits within

twenty (20) days after the employer has knowledge of any disability that would qualify

Jor benefits under this chapter.” (Emphasis added.)

Here, XPO Logistics disputes that the twenty-five percent penalty applies to

temporary partial disability benefits. It relies on an unreported opinion of the Special

Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel, which states that the statute “imposes a penalty

of 25 percent on unpaid temporary total benefits only.” Building Materials Corp., et al.

v. Coleman, No. M2004-01829-WC-R3-CV, 2005 WL 3147658 (Tenn. Special Workers’

Comp. App. Panel Nov. 28, 2005). Respectfully, this Court disagrees with the Panel

because the clear statutory language reflects that it applies to “temporary disability

benefits” and does not limit that applicability to temporary total disability benefits only.

Likewise, the Court disagrees with XPO Logistics’s assertion that the language in

Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-118(a)(13) controls. Tennessee Code Annotated

section 50-6-118(a)(13) is a separate statute that authorizes the Bureau of Workers’

Compensation to issue penalties for an employer’s “[w]rongful failure” to pay temporary

total disability benefits. However, that statute does not trump the authority the

Legislature provided in 50-6-205(b)(3) for the Court to assess a penalty “as to all

temporary disability benefits that are determined not to be paid in compliance with this

subsection (b).” (Emphasis added.)

In 2004, Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-205(b)(3) changed significantly.

Before 2004, Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-205 stated: “[a]ny employer or his

insurance carrier who fails to pay compensation as herein provided shall suffer a penalty

of six percent (6%) on any unpaid installments.” (Emphasis added.) The Tennessee

Supreme Court interpreted “shall suffer a penalty” to mean that “the failure to pay must

be in bad faith on the part of the defendant.” Mayes v. Genesco, Inc., 510 S.W.2d 882,

885 (Tenn. 1974). However, in 2004, the Reform changed the statute to its current

language granting authority to assess a 25% penalty to “workers’ compensation

specialists” now “workers’ compensation judges.” Importantly, the 2004 Reform deleted

the “shall suffer a penalty” language relied upon by the Tennessee Supreme Court in

1974.

After the 2004 Reform, the Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel

continued to use the Supreme Court’s prior reasoning regarding “bad faith” in its analysis

of the twenty-five percent penalty. See, Kyle v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., No. W2013-

01505-WC-R3-WC, 2014 Tenn. LEXIS 702, at *22-23 (Tenn. Special Workers’ Comp.

Panel Oct. 2, 2014); Overton v. Regis Corp., No. M2007-00069-WC-R3-WC, 2008 Tenn.

LEXIS 799, at *17-18 (Tenn. Special Workers’ Comp. Panel Nov. 4, 2008).

Respectfully, this Court disagrees with the Panel’s continued reliance upon the Supreme

Court’s 1974 “bad faith” analysis. The 1974 statutory language that prompted the

Tennessee Supreme Court’s imposition of a bad faith requirement no longer exists.”

Therefore, the Court holds that the “bad faith” analysis is no longer required in

determining whether to assess a twenty-five percent penalty.

After carefully considering the entire record, including XPO Logistics’s response,

the Court determines that XPO Logistics was not in compliance with Section 50-6-

205(b)(3)(A). As previously noted, the Court is not swayed by XPO Logistics’s assertion

that the twenty-five percent penalty does not apply to temporary partial disability

benefits.

Likewise, even if “bad faith” remains the standard, the Court notes that XPO

Logistics denied Mr. Lowder’s claim in February based on the “immediacy” element of

the hernia statute. Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-212. XPO Logistics offered no factual

evidence, medical or otherwise, to this Court that substantiated the denial on this ground.

And the record does not reflect that any new information developed between February

* The Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board allows reliance on precedent from the Tennessee

Supreme Court “unless it is evident that the Supreme Court’s decision or rationale relied on a remedial

interpretation of pre-July 1, 2014 statutes, that it relied on specific statutory language no longer contained

in the Workers’ Compensation Law, and/or that it relied on an analysis that has since been addressed by

the general assembly through statutory amendments.” McCord v. Advantage Human Resourcing, 2015

TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 6, at *13 n.4 (Tenn. Workers’ Comp. App. Bd. Mar. 27, 2015).

and April that would eliminate its defense of the immediacy requirement when XPO

Logistics decided to accept the claim and paid $4,394.82 in past temporary partial

disability benefits. Specifically, the Court finds that XPO failed to pay temporary

disability benefits within twenty days after having knowledge of Mr. Lowder’s disability.

Therefore, the Court assesses a $1,098.71 penalty against XPO Logistics.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows:

l.

XPO Logistics shall pay Mr. Lowder a twenty-five percent penalty in the amount

of $1,098.71 for the period of January 24, 2019, through April 26, 2019.

This case is set for a Status Hearing on Thursday, August 29, 2019, at 1:30

p-m. Eastern Time. The parties must call (423) 634-0164 or toll-free at (855)

383-0001 to participate. Failure to call may result in a determination of the issues

without your participation.

. Absent an appeal within seven business days of issuance, this order shall become

final. XPO Logistics must comply within fifteen calendar days of the order

becoming final or be subject to penalties set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated

section 50-6-238(d). The Insurer or Employer must submit confirmation of

compliance with this Order to the Bureau. by’ email to

WCCompliance.Program@tn.gov no later than the fifteenth business day after this

Order becomes final. 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 via email at WCCompliance.Program(@tn.gov.

ENTERED June 27, 2019.

AUDREY 4. HEADRICK

Workers’ Compensation Judge

APPENDIX

Exhibits:

Panel

February 19, 2019 letter from Sedgwick

Paystubs (December 18, 2018, to April 27, 2019)

Medical records of Physicians Care (For Identification Only)’

Medical records of CHI Memorial (For Identification Only)

Medical records of Dr. Darren Hunt

Affidavit of William Kyle Lowder

Affidavit of Christopher Mabe

SCAAWEWN >

Technical record:

1. Petition for Benefit Determination

2. Dispute Certification Notice

3. Request for Expedited Hearing

4. Employer’s Response in Opposition to Employee’s Request for Expedited

Hearing

Docketing Notice

6. Employer’s Supplemental Response in Opposition to Employee’s Request for

Expedited Hearing

7. Notice of Filing

WG

The Court did not admit into evidence medical records from Physicians Care or CHI Memorial based on

XPO Logistics’s objection, since there was neither a medical certification nor a physician’s signature.

I certify that a copy of this Order Assessing Penalty was sent to these recipients as

indicated below on June 27, 2019.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Name Certified Via Service sent to:

Mail Email

William Lowder, x x klowder676(@gmail.com

Employee 611 Mountain Wood Drive

Hixson, TN 37343

Frederick W. Hodge, x fhodge@howell-fisher.com

Employer’s Attorney

Compliance Program x WCCompliance.program(@tn.gov

Av Wy Sui

PENNY SHRUM, COURT CLERK

we.courtclerk(@tn.gov

bu

KT

Wi OUPriasny )

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.