The opinion
FILED
Oct 26, 2020
03:46 PM(CT)
TENNESSEE COURT OF
WORKERS' COMPENSATION
CLAIMS
TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS
AT JACKSON
BILLY BEECHAM, ) Docket No. 2019-07-0184
Employee, )
v. )
CELADON GROUP, INC., ) State File No. 82322-2017
Employer, )
And )
AGRI GENERAL INS. CO., ) Judge Amber E. Luttrell
Carrier. )
COMPENSATION ORDER GRANTING BENEFITS
The Court held a Compensation Hearing on September 30, 2020, on Mr. Beecham’s
claim for workers’ compensation benefits for injuries to his neck, back, and shoulder.
Celadon contended Mr. Beecham’s claim is barred based on his alleged violation of its
safety rules. For the reasons below, the Court holds Celadon did not prevail on its safety
rule defense and awards Mr. Beecham one-percent permanent partial disability benefits
and lifetime future medical benefits.
Claim History
Mr. Beecham, an over-the-road truck driver, sustained injuries to his neck, back,
and shoulder on October 18, 2017, when he fell while exiting his truck. He reported the
incident, continued working, and sought authorized treatment from an urgent-care clinic a
few days later. Over the next year, Mr. Beecham underwent conservative treatment and
continued working full-duty through October 2018. After an orthopedic referral, Mr.
Beecham received a panel from which he selected Dr. Timothy Sweo.
Mr. Beecham first saw Dr. Sweo in October 2018. Dr. Sweo diagnosed cervicalgia
and left-shoulder pain and temporarily restricted him from driving a truck. Although
Celadon could accommodate his restrictions, Mr. Beecham declined to return to work. He
stated he could not continue driving due to pain. Dr. Sweo did not recommend surgery. He
placed Mr. Beecham at maximum medical improvement in January 2019 and assigned a
1
one-percent permanent impairment rating with no permanent restrictions. Mr. Beecham
testified he started receiving social security retirement benefits in January 2019 in the gross
amount of $1,440 per month.
After Mr. Beecham obtained a conflicting impairment rating from an independent
medical evaluator, he saw Dr. David West for an evaluation through the Bureau’s Medical
Impairment Rating Registry program. Dr. West agreed with Dr. Sweo’s one-percent
impairment rating. Dr. West’s rating was the only one admitted into evidence.
Mr. Beecham filed a Petition for Benefit Determination because he was dissatisfied
with his authorized treatment, and he requested an expedited hearing seeking additional
treatment. After a hearing, the Court ordered Celadon to provide medical benefits with his
authorized physician. Afterward, the Court granted Celadon’s Motion to Amend the
Dispute Certification Notice to add willful misconduct as an affirmative defense. Celadon
based the amendment request on video surveillance footage of Mr. Beecham’s accident
obtained after the Dispute Certification Notice was issued. Celadon then filed a Motion for
Summary Judgment, which the Court denied.
Hearing Testimony
Mr. Beecham testified regarding the details of his accident and Celadon’s safety rule
defense. He stated the accident occurred because he was wearing sunglasses and did not
notice he stepped in oil the first time he exited the truck. The oil on his shoes caused him
to slip and fall when he attempted to exit the truck a second time.
Mr. Beecham acknowledged the two safety policies Celadon contended he violated.
First, he agreed that Celadon required drivers to wear slip-resistant shoes. He admitted that
he wore “Crocs” rubber shoes at the time of his accident because they were more
comfortable. He stated Celadon knew he did this. Second, he acknowledged Celadon’s
policy for exiting the tractor, which requires drivers to exit rear-facing and using three-
points of contact. Mr. Beecham admitted he exited the tractor forward-facing and chose
not to follow the three-point contact rule.1 He stated that other drivers do the same, and
Celadon was aware he did this. He admitted that Wanda Carter, Celadon’s safety-manager,
counseled him regarding these safety rules after the accident; however, he stated she kept
him working for another year until he quit.
Celadon offered the affidavit of Ms. Carter into evidence to support its defense. Mr.
Beecham objected because Ms. Carter was not present for cross-examination. Celadon’s
counsel responded that Celadon filed for bankruptcy, and he was unable to reach Ms.
Carter. The Court took the objection under advisement and sustains the objection. The
1
The parties introduced video, which accurately depicted Mr. Beecham’s fall in its entirety and confirmed
he exited the truck forward facing without using three points of contact.
2
affidavit is hearsay, and Celadon offered no proof to satisfy an exception under Tennessee
Rules of Evidence 804(a)(1-6) to show Ms. Carter was unavailable.2
Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
At a Compensation Hearing, Mr. Beecham must establish by a preponderance of the
evidence that he is entitled to the requested benefits. Willis v. All Staff, 2015 TN Wrk.
Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 42, at *18 (Nov. 9, 2015); see also Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-
239(c)(6) (2019).
For Celadon to prevail on its safety rule defense, it has the burden of proving four
elements: (1) Mr. Beecham’s actual, as opposed to constructive, notice of the rule; (2) his
understanding of the danger involved in violating the rule; (3) Celadon’s bona fide
enforcement of the rule; and, (4) Mr. Beecham’s lack of a valid excuse for violating the
rule. Mitchell v. Fayetteville Pub. Utilities, 368 S.W.3d 442, 453 (Tenn. 2012). Here,
Celadon submitted no proof or insufficient proof to satisfy factors two and three, which
require that Mr. Beecham understood the danger involved in violating the rules and that
Celadon enforced the rules. For these reasons, this defense must fail.3
Since Mr. Beecham’s claim is not barred by the asserted defense, the Court holds
that the preponderance of the evidence shows he suffered an injury arising primarily out of
and in the course and scope of his employment on October 18, 2017. Based on Dr. West’s
rating, the Court finds Mr. Beecham sustained a one-percent permanent impairment. By
stipulation, his compensation rate is $669.50; however, the Court finds Celadon is entitled
to an offset based on Mr. Beecham’s social security retirement benefits of $1,440 per
month. After the offset, Mr. Beecham’s weekly compensation rate is reduced to $503.35,
and he is entitled to an original award of $2,265.08 in permanent disability benefits (1% x
450= 4.5 weeks x $503.35= $2,265.08) with future medical benefits.4
As for additional benefits, Mr. Beecham did not argue he was entitled to increased
benefits. Nevertheless, the proof showed Celadon offered work to accommodate his
temporary restrictions; however, Mr. Beecham refused and voluntarily quit because he
believed he could no longer drive a truck. Dr. Sweo later released him at maximum medical
2
Notably, Celadon’s counsel was able to reach Ms. Carter to prepare and execute the affidavit in September
2019.
3
If Ms. Carter’s affidavit had been admissible, the Court finds her testimony failed to prove Mr. Beecham
understood the dangers of violating its policies or the company’s enforcement of its policies. Thus, the
defense would still fail.
4
For Mr. Beecham’s social security retirement offset calculation, Celadon contended his monthly $1440
equated to weekly retirement benefits of $332.31. It is entitled to an offset against the compensation rate
for fifty percent of the weekly retirement benefit. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-207. Fifty percent of $332.31
is $166.15 per week. After deducting $166.15 from Mr. Beecham’s $669.50 compensation rate, the
resulting rate is $503.35 per week.
3
improvement with no permanent restrictions. Under these facts, the Court finds Mr.
Beecham is not entitled to increased benefits and is limited to his original award.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows:
1. Mr. Beecham shall recover from Celadon Group Inc. or its insurance carrier
permanent partial disability benefits in the amount of $2,265.08.
2. Mr. Beecham shall receive future medical benefits under the statute.
3. Costs of $150.00 are assessed against Celadon Group Inc. under Tennessee
Compilation Rules and Regulations 0800-02-21-.07 (August 2019), to be paid
within five days of this order becoming final.
4. Celadon Group Inc. shall prepare and file the SD-2 with the Clerk within ten
business days of the date of this order under Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-
6-224.
5. Unless appealed, the order shall become final thirty days after issuance.
ENTERED October 26, 2020.
_____________________________________
JUDGE AMBER E. LUTTRELL
Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims
4
APPENDIX
Exhibits:
1. Wage statement
2. Video of accident
3. MIRR evaluation report
4. Premier Radiology report (2 pgs.)
5. Dr. Sweo’s records
Marked for Identification Only:
1. Wanda Carter’s affidavit
Technical record:
1. Petition for Benefit Determination
2. Dispute Certification Notice
3. Request for Expedited Hearing
4. Expedited Hearing Order
5. Employer’s Motion to Amend DCN
6. Order Granting Motion to Amend DCN
7. Employer’s Motion for Summary Judgment
8. Employee’s Response to Motion for Summary Judgment
9. Employer’s Reply to Employee’s Response
10. Order Denying Summary Judgment
11. Scheduling Order
12. Pre-Compensation Hearing Statement
13. Employer’s Pre-Hearing Brief
14. Post-Discovery DCN
5
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certify that a copy of this Order was sent as indicated on October 26, 2020.
Name Certified Email Service sent to:
Billy Beecham, X X P. O. Box 519
Employee Paris, TN 38242
billybeecham76@gmail.com
Kenny Veit, X kenny.veit@leitnerfirm.com
Attorney for Employer crystal.brown@leitnerfirm.com
_____________________________________
Penny Shrum, Clerk of Court
Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims
6
Compensation Hearing Order Right to Appeal:
If you disagree with this Compensation Hearing Order, you may appeal to the Workers’
Compensation Appeals Board or the Tennessee Supreme Court. To appeal to the Workers’
Compensation Appeals Board, 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 thirty calendar days of the date the
compensation hearing order was filed. When filing the Notice of Appeal, you must serve
a copy upon the opposing party (or attorney, if represented).
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 filing fee. You must file the fullycompleted
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
your 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. A licensed court
reporter must prepare a transcript and file it with the court clerk within fifteen calendar
days of the filing the Notice of Appeal. Alternatively, you may file a statement of the
evidence prepared jointly by both parties within fifteen calendar 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 of
the evidence 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. After the Workers’ Compensation Judge approves the record and the court clerk transmits
it to the Appeals Board, a docketing notice will be sent to the parties. The appealing party
has fifteen calendar days after the date of that notice to submit a brief to the Appeals Board.
See the Practices and Procedures of the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board.
To appeal your case directly to the Tennessee Supreme Court, the Compensation Hearing
Order must be final and you must comply with the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure.
If neither party timely files an appeal with the Appeals Board, the trial court’s Order will
become final by operation of law thirty calendar days after entry. See Tenn. Code Ann. §
50-6-239(c)(7).
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/
wc.courtclerk@tn.gov | 1-800-332-2667
Docket No.: ________________________
State File No.: ______________________
Date of Injury: _____________________
___________________________________________________________________________
Employee
v.
___________________________________________________________________________ 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 filestamped on
the first page of the order(s) being appealed):
□ Expedited Hearing Order filed on _______________ □ Motion Order filed on ___________________
□ Compensation Order filed on__________________ □ 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): _________________________________________ ☐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 1 of 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 I 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