FERGUSON, DOREEN v. WEST QUALITY FOOD SERVICES, INC.

2025 TN WC 46
CourtTennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
DecidedJuly 18, 2025
Docket2024-70-2502
StatusPublished

This text of 2025 TN WC 46 (FERGUSON, DOREEN v. WEST QUALITY FOOD SERVICES, INC.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
FERGUSON, DOREEN v. WEST QUALITY FOOD SERVICES, INC., 2025 TN WC 46 (Tenn. Super. Ct. 2025).

Opinion

FILED Jul 18, 2025 08:00 AM(CT) TENNESSEE COURT OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS

TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS AT JACKSON

DOREEN FERGUSON, ) Docket No. 2024-70-2502 Employee, ) v. ) State File No. 37982-2022 WEST QUALITY FOOD SERVICES, ) INC., ) Employer. ) Judge Amber E. Luttrell

COMPENSATION ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT

West filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that Ms. Ferguson did not present evidence that her knee condition and need for knee replacement surgery arose primarily out of her employment, which is an essential element of her claim. For the reasons below, the Court holds Ms. Ferguson did not present the necessary evidence, and West is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Facts

West filed a statement of undisputed material facts with citations to the record in compliance with Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure 56.03 (2024). Those facts are summarized as follows:

1. Ms. Ferguson alleged a left knee injury occurring on March 16, 2022. 2. She received orthopedic treatment from Dr. David Pearce. 3. Dr. Pearce recommended left total-knee replacement surgery. 4. Dr. Michael Calfee examined Ms. Ferguson at West’s request. 5. Dr. Calfee diagnosed primary osteoarthritis and an extruded left medial meniscal tear. 6. Dr. Calfee concluded that Ms. Ferguson’s primary osteoarthritis and the extruded left medial meniscal tear are not more than 50% related to the alleged accident on March 16, 2022. 7. Dr. Calfee also testified that Ms. Ferguson’s need for left total-knee replacement surgery is not more than 50% medically necessary as a result of the alleged March

1 16, 2022 injury.

West cited to Dr. Calfee’s deposition and argued that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Ms. Ferguson did not respond to the motion. At the hearing, she stated that she has knee symptoms and needs surgery.

Analysis

Summary judgment is appropriate “if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” Tenn. R. Civ. P. 56.04.

As the moving party, West must do one of two things to prevail on its motion: (1) submit affirmative evidence that negates an essential element of Ms. Ferguson’s claim, or (2) demonstrate that her evidence is insufficient to establish an essential element of her claim. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-16-101 (2023); see also Rye v. Women’s Care Ctr. of Memphis, MPLLC, 477 S.W.3d 235, 264 (Tenn. 2015). West did both.

The essential element at issue here is causation. To prevail in a workers’ compensation claim, an employee must show to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that an injury and need for treatment arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of the employment. Here, this requires a showing by a preponderance of the evidence that Ms. Ferguson’s employment contributed more than 50% in causing the knee injury and need for knee-replacement surgery, considering all causes. Shown to a reasonable degree of medical certainty means that, in the opinion of the physician, it is more likely than not considering all causes, as opposed to speculation or possibility. Tenn. Code Ann. §50-6- 102(12). See also Payne v. D & D Elec., 2017 Tenn. LEXIS 215, at *9 (Apr. 18, 2017).

West filed a statement of undisputed material facts containing seven statements. Because Ms. Ferguson did not respond under Rule 56, the Court considers the facts undisputed. Based on these facts, West successfully submitted affirmative evidence, through Dr. Calfee’s testimony, which negated the essential element of causation of Ms. Ferguson’s claim.

West also demonstrated that her evidence is insufficient to establish causation. In the scheduling order, the Court gave Ms. Ferguson until April 11, 2025, to secure any medical proof of causation and provide a copy of that proof, specifically a physician’s report, to opposing counsel. West asserts that she missed the deadline, and the proof affirms that assertion as no other opinion admissible at the summary judgment stage exists in the record. Thus, the only medical opinion available at this summary judgment stage came from Dr. Calfee, and that opinion does not support causation.

2 Thus, the burden shifts to Ms. Ferguson to produce specific facts supported by citations to the record showing that a genuine issue concerning causation exists for trial. Rye, 477 S.W.3d at 265. She did not, as she filed no response. Thus, she did not meet her burden, and summary judgment is appropriate.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows:

1. West’s motion for summary judgment is granted, and Ms. Ferguson’s claim is dismissed with prejudice.

2. Unless appealed, this order shall become final 30 days after entry.

3. The Court taxes the $150.00 filing fee to West Quality Food Service, Inc. or its carrier under Tennessee Compilation Rules and Regulations 0800-02-21-.06 (2023), payable to the Clerk within five days of this order becoming final.

4. West shall prepare and submit the SD-2 with the Clerk within ten days of the date of judgment.

ENTERED July 18, 2025.

_____________________________________ JUDGE AMBER E. LUTTRELL Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of this Order was sent as indicated on July 18, 2025.

Name First Class Mail Email Service sent to: Doreen Ferguson, X X 7830 Main St., Enville, TN 38332 Employee doreenferguson49@gmail.com Chris G. Rowe, X cgrowe@mijs.com Employer’s Attorney aacollins@mijs.com

________________________________ Penny Shrum, Court Clerk wc.courtclerk@tn.gov

3 Right to Appeal: If you disagree with the Court’s Order, you may appeal to the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board. To do so, you must: 1. Complete the enclosed form entitled “Notice of Appeal” and file it with the Clerk of the Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims before the expiration of the deadline. ¾ If the order being appealed is “expedited” (also called “interlocutory”), or if the order does not dispose of the case in its entirety, the notice of appeal must be filed within seven (7) business days of the date the order was filed. ¾ If the order being appealed is a “Compensation Order,” or if it resolves all issues in the case, the notice of appeal must be filed within thirty (30) calendar days of the date the Compensation Order was filed. When filing the Notice of Appeal, you must serve a copy on 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 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 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 your appeal.

3. You are responsible for ensuring a complete record is presented on appeal. If no court reporter was present at the hearing, you may request from the Court Clerk the audio recording of the hearing for a $25.00 fee.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Michelle RYE Et Al. v. WOMEN’S CARE CENTER OF MEMPHIS, MPLLC Et Al.
477 S.W.3d 235 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2025 TN WC 46, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ferguson-doreen-v-west-quality-food-services-inc-tennworkcompcl-2025.