Opinion

Ameri, Rachel v. Denso Automotive Ohio, Inc.

  • 2020 TN WC 54
Court
Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
Filed
Jun 9, 2020
Status
Published
On the bench
Kenneth M. Switzer
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 12.5%

The opinion

TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION

IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS

AT NASHVILLE

Rachel Ameri, ) Docket No. 2019-06-1769

Employee, )

V. )

Denso Automotive Ohio, Inc., ) State File No. 57967-2019

Employer, )

And )

The Hartford Accident & Indemnity ) Judge Kenneth M. Switzer

Co., )

Carrier. )

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER

Rachel Ameri asked this Court to order Denso Automotive Ohio to provide another

panel of physicians, pay for emergency treatment, and provide temporary disability

benefits. The Court held an expedited hearing on June 4, 2020, and concludes that because

she signed the Choice of Physicians form and accepted treatment with that physician, she

is not entitled to a new panel. As for her emergency room visits, Denso is not responsible

for those expenses because she never introduced bills of the treatment into evidence.

Concerning temporary disability benefits, she failed to establish entitlement at this time.

History of Claim

Ms. Ameri testified that on August 5, 2019, a pallet full of parts fell on her, pushing

her to the ground and injuring her neck and shoulders. Afterward, she spoke with team

leader Ken Heiney and plant manager Brandon Hofmann, who offered a panel.

The parties dispute the circumstances surrounding her choice of Dr. Alexander

Chernowitz. According to Ms. Ameri, Denso presented her with a panel form, which she

completed two days later. She testified that, on the date of injury, Mr. Heiney pointed to

Dr. Chernowitz’s name on the form and said she must choose him. According to Ms.

Ameri, Mr. Heiney then asked Mr. Hofmann if she must choose Dr. Chernowitz, and he

said yes. Ms. Ameri said that when she actually completed the form admitted into evidence

1

(Ex. 2 at 6) on August 7, the layout of the document was different, and it listed different

physicians than were on the panel she saw on August 5. However, she admitted that the

form, dated August 5, contains her handwriting and signature. In contrast, Mr. Heiney’s

and Mr. Hofmann’s affidavits read, using virtually identical verbiage, that Ms. Ameri said

she did not wish to see the two doctors on the list who practice in Murfreesboro, so she

chose Dr. Chernowitz because his office is in Lebanon.

She saw Dr. Chernowitz that same day. He assessed a contusion of the right

shoulder and cervical strain/sprain and restricted her to “work at a reduced pace.” The next

day, he added lifting and reaching restrictions. He took her off work and referred her to

physical therapy on August 9. After an August 13 visit, he placed restrictions again.

Neither party introduced treatment records from Dr. Chernowitz after that date.

Meanwhile, Ms. Ameri participated in regular physical therapy throughout the month of

August.

Ms. Ameri’s next authorized medical visit was with orthopedist Dr. Brandon

Downs, whom she chose from a panel. According to a medical status form from this visit,

he referred her to Dr. Jeffrey Hazlewood.

Dr. Hazlewood’s records are incomplete; the parties introduced only notes from Ms.

Ameri’s last visit on October 30. Dr. Hazlewood wrote:

Severe complaints of extreme cervical pain with extreme range of motion

deficits that I have no medical explanation for. I no longer feel that this is a

continued soft tissue strain injury given the fact that I [sic] is essentially no

better almost three months out, and she has been through extensive treatment.

Her diagnosis is just a symptom of cervical pain, and I have no medical

explanation. She has had a CT scan that was negative, and MRO scan that

showed pre-existing degenerative changes. Examination shows no objective

deficits. She has self limited effort and pain behavior.

Dr. Hazlewood placed her at maximum medical improvement, assigned no permanent

restrictions, and assessed a zero-percent impairment rating.

As for her unauthorized treatment, Ms. Ameri testified without contradiction to a

pattern of delay on Denso’s part in providing authorized care. Specifically, on August 10,

she woke up in pain and called four times during the day to request additional treatment.

No one answered her calls by 5:00 p.m., so she went to the emergency room.’ Ms. Ameri

'Ms. Ameri stated during closing argument that she called Denso on September 6 and attempted to speak

to the adjuster, who was unavailable, but someone else told her to go the doctor on her own and it would

be covered. The Court cannot consider this assertion as testimony, however, because the proof phase of

the case was already closed.

filed a copy of the bill with the Court Clerk, but she did not introduce the bill into evidence

at the hearing.

Ms. Ameri testified in her affidavit that Denso reassigned her to a different job to

accommodate her restrictions but it paid less. However, she offered no documentation or

live testimony regarding the new position, the amount of pay she earned in the previous

job and the new one, and when she began the new position.

Ms. Ameri testified in her affidavit that she still suffers from neck pain, and she

asked that the Court order Denso to provide a new panel.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

Ms. Ameri must show that she is likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits. See

Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(1) (2019); McCord v. Advantage Human Resourcing, 2015

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

Turning first to Ms. Ameri’s contentions regarding the manner in which she chose

a physician, Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-204(a)(3)(A)(i) states in relevant part

that “[t]he injured employee shall accept the medical benefits afforded under this section;

provided that . . . the employer shall designate a group of three (3) or more independent

reputable physicians . . . from which the injured employee shall select one (1) to be the

treating physician.”

Here, Mr. Heiney and Mr. Hofmann testified by affidavit that Ms. Ameri chose Dr.

Chernowitz due to his location in Lebanon. On close examination of these affidavits, the

Court notes that they contain nearly identical language in statements one through nine —

right down to the same misspellings. Although their testimony by affidavit complies with

the Court’s rules regarding their admissibility into evidence, this method of evidence

presentation left Ms. Ameri no opportunity to cross-examine them. For these reasons, the

Court gives little weight to either affidavit.

In contrast, Ms. Ameri credibly testified that she received two panel forms, and that

with the first panel, her supervisors directed her to choose Dr. Chernowitz. Importantly,

however, only one panel was admitted into evidence, and Ms. Ameri acknowledged that it

bears her signature. Looking to the four corners of the panel form, the Court finds that

Denso offered a panel of three physicians, and Ms. Ameri selected Dr. Chernowitz, signed

the form, and accepted treatment from him. Under these circumstances, the Court finds

that Denso complied with the Workers’ Compensation Law and holds that Ms. Ameri is

not entitled to a new panel of physicians.

The Court next turns to Ms. Ameri’s request that Denso pay for her emergency room

visits. An employer may risk being required to pay for unauthorized treatment if it does

3

not provide the treatment made reasonably necessary by the work injury as required by

Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-204(a)(1)(A). Hackney v. Integrity Staffing

Solutions, 2016 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 29, at *8-9 (July 22, 2016). However,

the employer must first be given an opportunity to provide the treatment, and “[w]hether

an employee is justified in seeking additional medical services to be paid for by the

employer without consulting the employer depends on the circumstances of each case.” Id.

at *9. As observed by the Tennessee Supreme Court, an “employee [should] do no less

than to consult [the] employer before incurring expenses called for by the statute if the

employee expects the employer to pay for them.” J/d., citing Dorris v. INA Ins. Co., 764

S.W.2d 538, 541 (Tenn. 1989)

In this case, Ms. Ameri credibly testified to delays in scheduling appointments when

she experienced pain. Specifically, the Court finds that she consulted Denso on August 10.

When it did not act promptly to provide treatment, she reasonably sought emergency care

on her own. However, since the medical bill was not admitted into evidence, the record

constrains the Court from ordering payment at this time.

Finally, the Court considers Ms. Ameri’s request for temporary disability benefits.

Tennessee law recognizes two types of temporary disability benefits: temporary total and

temporary partial disability.

Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-205(a) states that “no compensation shall

be allowed for the first seven days of disability.” Here, Ms. Ameri provided documentation

showing Dr. Chernowitz took her off work on August 9 through 13, four days, so she is

ineligible for temporary total disability benefits for that time. She did not provide any other

medical documentation taking her completely off work.

An injured worker is entitled to temporary partial disability benefits when the

temporary disability is not total. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-207(1)-(2). Temporary

partial disability refers to the time, if any, during which the injured employee is able to

resume some gainful employment but has not reached maximum recovery. Frye v. Vincent

Printing Co., 2016 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 34, at *15-16 (Aug. 2, 2016.) In Ms.

Ameri’s case, Dr. Chernowitz placed restrictions, which Denso accommodated by placing

her in a different position that she said paid less. However, she offered no testimony or

documentary proof to show when the new job started, how much less money she earned,

and for how long. On this record, the Court is unable to grant either temporary total or

temporary partial benefits at this time.

In conclusion, Ms. Ameri has not presented sufficient evidence from which this

Court may conclude that she is likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits. Her requests

are denied at this time.

This case is set for a scheduling hearing on July 13, 2020, at 9:30 a.m. Central

Time. You must call 615-532-9552 or toll-free at 866-943-0025 to participate. Failure to

call might result in a determination of the issues without your participation.

ENTERED June 9. 2020.

Kenneth M Switzer

JUDGE KENNETH M. SWITZER

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

APPENDIX

Exhibits:

1) Affidavit of Rachel Ameri

2) Affidavit of Brandon Hofmann, with attached Choice of Physicians form and email

resignation.

3) Affidavit of Ken Heiney

4) Medical Records filed by Employer

5)

Additional Medical Records

Technical record:

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)

7)

8)

9)

Petition for Benefit Determination

Dispute Certification Notice

Order (setting a show-cause hearing)

Order on Show Cause Hearing

Request for Expedited Hearing

Employer’s List of Anticipated Witnesses and Exhibits

Employer’s Expedited hearing Position Statement

Transfer Order and Order Setting Pretrial

Pretrial Order

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of the Expedited Hearing Order was sent as indicated on June

9. 2020.

Name Certified | Regular | Email | Service sent to:

Mail Mail

Rachel Ameri, xX xX Rachelameri @ aol.com

Employee

231B Hidden Acres Dr.

Lebanon, TN 37087

Andrew Hebar, David

Otten,

Employer’s attorneys

4 ahebar @ wimberlylawson.com

dotten @ wimberlylawson.com

snunnally @ wimberlylawson.com

i;

|;

fi AA Ata

anes Seite

ces |

( fy

Penny Shrum, Clerk of Court

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: “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

conceming 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.

NOTICE OF APPEAL

Tennessee Bureau of Workers’ Compensation

www.tn.gov/workforce/injuries-at-work/

wce.courtclerk@tn.gov | 1-800-332-2667

Docket No.:

State File No.:

Date of injury:

Employee

Employer

Notice is given that

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

appeals the following order(s) of the Tennessee Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims to the

Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (check one or more applicable boxes and include the date file-

stamped on the first page of the order(s) being appealed):

0 Expedited Hearing Order filed on O Motion Order filed on

0 Compensation Order filed on C1 Other Order filed on

issued by Judge

Statement of the Issues on Appeal

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

Parties

Appellant(s) (Requesting Party): fo Employer] ‘Employee

Address: Phone:

Email:

Attorney’s Name: BPR#:

Attorney's Email: Phone:

Attorney's Address:

* Attach an additional sheet for each additional Appellant *

LB-1099 rev. 01/20 Page lof 2 RDA 11082

Employee Name: Docket No.: Date of Inj.:

Appellee(s) (Opposing Party): [| Employer [- ‘Employee

Appellee’s Address: Phone:

Email:

Attorney’s Name: BPR#:

Attorney’s Email: Phone:

Attorney’s Address:

* Attach an additional sheet for each additional Appellee *

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, , certify that | have forwarded a

true and exact copy of this Notice of Appeal by First Class mail, postage prepaid, or in any manner as described

in Tennessee Compilation Rules & Regulations, Chapter 0800-02-21, to all parties and/or their attorneys in this

case on this the day of , 20

[Signature of appellant or attorney for appellant]

LB-1099 rev. 01/20 Page 2 of 2 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.