Opinion

Wilson, Scott v. American Paper & Twine Co.

  • 2022 TN WC 38
Court
Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
Filed
May 2, 2022
Status
Published
On the bench
Dale Tipps
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

FILED

May 02, 2022

08:25 AM(CT)

TENNESSEE COURT OF

WORKERS' COMPENSATION

CLAIMS

TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS

IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS

AT MURFREESBORO

SCOTT WILSON, ) Docket No. 2021-05-0344

Employee, )

v. )

)

AMERICAN PAPER & TWINE CO., ) State File No. 18268-2020

Employer, )

And )

)

ACCIDENT FUND GENERAL INS. CO., ) Judge Dale Tipps

Insurance Carrier. )

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER GRANTING BENEFITS

The Court held an Expedited Hearing on April 27, 2022, to determine whether Mr.

Wilson is entitled to additional medical treatment, specifically treatment for his carpal

tunnel/cubital tunnel syndrome. The Court finds that Mr. Wilson is likely to prove this

condition is a natural consequence of his compensable shoulder injury. Therefore, the

Court holds that he is likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits.

History of Claim

The parties agreed that Mr. Wilson suffered a compensable left-shoulder injury on

January 14, 2020. American Paper provided medical benefits, including rotator cuff repair

surgery by Dr. Joseph Wieck.

Mr. Wilson testified that after the surgery, he had severe numbness and tingling in

his left hand, something that he had not experienced before. He reported the problem to

Dr. Wieck at his two-week appointment, and the doctor told him it was probably caused

by inflammation from the surgery and that it should resolve.

About six weeks after surgery, while Mr. Wilson was still on light duty, he had a

workplace fall on June 24. He returned to Dr. Wieck, who found no new injury. Mr.

Wilson told him again about the hand numbness, and Dr. Wieck said those symptoms

would probably improve after he started physical therapy. When the problem persisted for

another three months, Dr. Wieck ordered an EMG test.

Dr. Wieck then left his medical practice, and Dr. Joseph Shaffer assumed Mr.

Wilson’s care. Dr. Shaffer reviewed the EMG results and diagnosed carpal tunnel

syndrome but said that “this would not be attributed to his work injury.” He then placed

Mr. Wilson at maximum medical improvement, assigned an impairment rating, and

released him with no restrictions.

As Mr. Wilson’s symptoms persisted, American Paper provided a panel of hand

specialists for a second opinion, from which he selected Dr. Paul Abbey. Dr. Abbey

examined Mr. Wilson and diagnosed both carpal tunnel and cubital tunnel syndrome in the

left arm. His treatment note says, “I believe that the carpal tunnel and cubital tunnel are

UNRELATED to work. They are a result of his prior rotator cuff surgery.” (Emphasis in

original).

American Paper then sent a questionnaire to Dr. Abbey that said Mr. Wilson was

“being evaluated for numbness in his left wrist/hand after an incident on 6/24/20 when he

stepped off a trailer and fell approximately 5 feet.” It then asked whether the hand and

wrist symptoms were causally related to that work injury. Dr. Abbey checked the response

that said, “I do not believe that [these] symptoms are causally related to work and this is a

personal, pre-existing condition.”

Dr. Abbey gave a deposition and answered questions about the cause of Mr.

Wilson’s carpal/cubital tunnel symptoms. He said he had often seen patients who had this

condition after shoulder surgery and that Mr. Wilson’s surgery was a contributing factor in

this case. However, he was not able to say that the rotator cuff surgery was greater than

fifty percent responsible for this condition. He also confirmed that Mr. Wilson was a

candidate for carpal tunnel release surgery and possibly cubital tunnel surgery.

At the conclusion of the hearing, Mr. Wilson requested medical treatment for his

carpal/cubital tunnel syndrome. American Paper contended that he was not entitled to this

treatment because he presented no medical proof that his employment was the primary

cause of these conditions.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

For the Court to grant Mr. Wilson’s requests, he must prove he is likely to prevail

at a hearing on the merits. Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(1) (2021); McCord v.

Advantage Human Resourcing, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 6, at *7-8, 9 (Mar.

27, 2015).

American Paper did not contest the compensability of the shoulder injury but

contended that Mr. Wilson is not entitled to treatment for his carpal/cubital tunnel

syndrome, which he claimed is the result of his shoulder surgery. Thus, the specific

questions before the Court are: 1) what standard is used in cases where an employee alleges

an injury that flows from the primary compensable injury; and 2) whether Mr. Wilson is

likely to meet that standard.

American Paper relied on the standard in Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-

102(14), which requires Mr. Wilson to show that his alleged injuries arose primarily out of

and in the course and scope of his employment. This includes the requirement that he must

show, “to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that [the incident] contributed more than

fifty percent (50%) in causing the . . . disablement or need for medical treatment,

considering all causes.” Because Dr. Abbey was unable to say that the rotator cuff surgery

was greater than fifty percent responsible for the carpal tunnel syndrome, American Paper

maintains that Mr. Wilson has not met his burden of proving compensability of that

condition. However, this is not the correct analysis.

The Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board recently addressed this question in

Braden v. Mohawk Indus. Inc., 2022 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 11 (Mar. 1, 2022).

In a lengthy exploration of the “direct and natural consequences rule,” the Board reiterated

its previous holding that “[w]hen the primary injury is shown to have arisen out of and in

the course of employment, every natural consequence that flows from the injury likewise

arises out of the employment. Therefore, all the medical consequences and sequelae that

flow from the primary injury are compensable.” It concluded that an employee need not

prove that the secondary injury was primarily caused by the work injury. Id. at *11.

Applying this standard to Mr. Wilson’s claim, the Court is faced with two medical

opinions. The first comes from Dr. Shaffer, who said that the carpel tunnel syndrome

“would not be attributed to his work injury.” Again, however, the issue is not whether the

carpal tunnel syndrome is attributable to the work injury but whether it is a natural

consequence of it. Dr. Shaffer’s opinion does not answer this question.

This leaves the opinion of Dr. Abbey. Although he was unable to identify Mr.

Wilson’s shoulder surgery as the primary cause of his carpal/cubital tunnel syndrome, his

treatment note said that these conditions were “a result of his prior rotator cuff surgery.”

He reiterated this opinion in his deposition when he said the shoulder surgery was a

contributing factor to the carpal/cubital tunnel syndrome.1

Dr. Abbey’s unrebutted opinion is sufficient to establish that Mr. Wilson’s

carpal/cubital tunnel syndrome is a natural consequence of his injury. Therefore, the Court

1

The Court disregards Dr. Abbey’s response to the questionnaire because it asked the wrong question –

whether the later workplace fall in June was the cause of Mr. Wilson’s hand and wrist conditions.

finds that he is likely to prove entitlement to treatment for these conditions.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows:

1. American Paper shall continue to provide medical benefits, including treatment with

Dr. Abbey for Mr. Wilson’s carpal/cubital tunnel syndrome.

2. A status hearing will take place on July 13, 2022, at 10:00 a.m. Central Time. The

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

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

3. Unless an interlocutory appeal of the 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). 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 confirmation within seven business days

may result in a penalty assessment for non-compliance. For questions regarding

compliance, contact the Workers’ Compensation Compliance Unit via email at

WCCompliance.Program@tn.gov.

ENTERED May 2, 2022.

_____________________________________

Judge Dale Tipps

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

APPENDIX

Exhibits:

1. Mr. Wilson’s affidavit

2. Transcript of Dr. Paul Abbey’s deposition

3. Medical records attached to American Paper’s Exhibit List

Technical record:

1. Petition for Benefit Determination

2. Dispute Certification Notice

3. Request for Expedited Hearing

4. Employer’s Pre-Hearing Brief

5. Employer’s Witness List

6. Employer’s Exhibit List

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

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

2, 2022.

Name Certified Fax Email Service sent to:

Mail

Scott Wilson, X X 227 Peebles Drive

Employee Smyrna, TN 37167

swilson@aptcommerce.com

Gordon Aulgur, X gordon.aulgur@afgroup.com

Employer’s Attorney cc: susan.block@afgroup.com

______________________________________

PENNY SHRUM, COURT CLERK

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

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.

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 file-

stamped 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

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.