Garland, Jeffrey v. City of Savannah

2023 TN WC 8
CourtTennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
DecidedFebruary 23, 2023
Docket2022-07-0162
StatusPublished

This text of 2023 TN WC 8 (Garland, Jeffrey v. City of Savannah) 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
Garland, Jeffrey v. City of Savannah, 2023 TN WC 8 (Tenn. Super. Ct. 2023).

Opinion

FILED Feb 23, 2023 07:36 AM(CT) TENNESSEE COURT OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS

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

JEFFREY GARLAND, ) Docket No.: 2022-07-0162 Employee, ) v. ) State File No.: 18240-2022 CITY OF SAVANNAH, ) Self-Insured Employer. ) Judge Robert Durham

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER DENYING BENEFITS

This Court held an Expedited Hearing on February 15, 2023, where Mr. Garland requested an order requiring Savannah to pay past temporary disability benefits and reimbursement for unauthorized medical expenses for an alleged left-elbow injury. Savannah defended on the grounds of causation and notice. The Court holds that Mr. Garland is not likely to prevail at trial as to causation and denies the request for benefits.

History of Claim

Mr. Garland works as a police officer for the City of Savannah.

On Saturday, October 30, 2021, while attempting to help Emergency Medical Services enter a home, he fell backward and injured his left elbow. In the weeks before this incident, Mr. Garland, a self-professed “gym rat,” had been treating for bursitis in both elbows and significantly modified his normal exercise regimen.

Mr. Garland testified that immediately after his fall, his left elbow swelled significantly, and the pain worsened. Still, he worked that day and the next, and although Mr. Garland experienced pain that caused difficulty in performing some work-related tasks, he admitted that he did not tell anyone with the police force about his fall. 1 1 Savannah introduced body cam and dash cam video purported to have been taken on October 30 that shows arrests being made by Officer Garland. However, there was some question as to whether the date on the video was accurate. Further, while one of the videos shows Officer Garland assisting another officer with a person resisting arrest, the initial resistance did not appear to be significant, and the rest occurred off-camera, although voices could be heard. Thus, the Court gives little weight to the videos. 1 On Monday, which was his day off, Mr. Garland attempted to lift weights, but the pain was so bad that he could not do anything with his left arm. He went to a clinic on his own the next day, had his elbow drained, and was referred to an orthopedist. The record from the visit said the pain “started one week earlier” and did not mention a work-related fall.

Mr. Garland went to work after the clinic visit. At lunch, he showed a video of his elbow being drained to his some of his fellow officers, including his immediate supervisor, Sergeant Wesley Murphy, and they saw how swollen his elbow was. However, Mr. Garland did not tell anyone about the fall or report a work-related injury.

Mr. Garland then treated with orthopedist Kenneth Nord on November 9. He complained of pain in both elbows, although the left was greater. None of Dr. Nord’s records referred to a work-related fall or addressed causation.

Although he continued working full duty for several months, Mr. Garland’s elbow caused him so much pain that he could not fully straighten his arm or lie on his left side. After conservative treatment failed to alleviate his symptoms, Mr. Garland underwent an MRI. The MRI revealed a “high-grade disruption” of the triceps tendon with chronic bone spurring where the tendon attached to the bone, as well as a fractured bone spur attached to the disrupted tendon that created a loose body in the elbow.

On March 4, Dr. Nord recommended surgery, and it was then that Mr. Garland gave Savannah official notice of the October 30 fall. Savannah denied his claim due to lack of notice. Mr. Garland had surgery on March 31 through his health insurance. He was off work from that date through sometime in June and had to use his vacation and sick leave during his recovery.

Mr. Garland’s rationale for not reporting the October 30 fall as a work-related injury or telling his doctors about it was that until the MRI, he thought his problems were solely due to his pre-existing bursitis. Once he knew of the fractured bone, he deduced that it must have happened with the fall.

Mr. Garland’s fellow officers, Mr. Murphy and Michael Darrington, testified on Savannah’s behalf. Mr. Murphy stated that at some point Mr. Garland told him about the October 30 fall, but he could not say when. However, he did remember Mr. Garland showing him the drainage video and his swollen elbow.

Mr. Darrington corroborated Mr. Murphy’s testimony about seeing the drainage video and the swollen elbow. However, he worked with Mr. Garland on the weekend of October 30, and he did not see any pain or limitations in Mr. Garland’s use of his left elbow, nor did he note any complaints from him.

2 Savannah offered further testimony from Captain Jeremy Bowen, Chief Michael Pitts, and former HR manager Bobbie Matlock. All testified that they did not know of Mr. Garland’s alleged work-related injury until he notified them on March 4.

On cross-examination, Mr. Murphy, Mr. Darrington, and Mr. Bowen all confirmed that they had no reason to question Mr. Garland’s integrity.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

Mr. Garland must present evidence from which this Court can determine that he is likely to prove at trial that his left elbow condition arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of his employment with Savannah and that he gave sufficient notice of this alleged work injury. See McCord v. Advantage Human Resourcing, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 6, at *9 (Mar. 27, 2015). The Court will first address causation.

Mr. Garland must present evidence that his employment caused an “injury” as that term is defined under Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Law. An accidental injury is one that was “caused by a specific incident, or set of incidents, arising primarily out of and in the course and scope of employment[.]” Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-102(12)(A) (2022). Also, Mr. Garland must prove causation to a “reasonable degree of medical certainty,” which requires an expert medical opinion. Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-102(12)(C).

As Savannah’s counsel observed at the hearing, while lack of notice is a defense in and of itself, it is also significant as to whether Mr. Garland has shown a likelihood of proving causation. The fact that Mr. Garland waited over four months to tell anyone about his fall on October 30 must be considered in determining whether the alleged fall was the actual cause of his elbow symptoms.

In his testimony, Mr. Garland unsuccessfully tried to walk a tightrope between notice and causation. On one hand, he said that the fall immediately caused such a significant increase in his pain and swelling that it hampered his ability to effectively use his left arm. Thus, when he learned that he had a fracture in his elbow, he was able to attribute it to the fall. On the other hand, when trying to explain why he did not immediately notify his employer about the incident, he said that he thought his symptoms were due to his pre-existing bursitis, and he did not connect the fall with an actual injury. These positions are hard to reconcile.

Other parts of the record also weigh against causation. Mr. Garland testified that immediately before the fall, he received treatment for elbow pain that was severe enough to caused him to modify his workout plan. The medical records contained no record of a work-related fall. In fact, the November 2 record said the pain began a week earlier, not on October 30, and Dr. Nord’s initial note referred to pain in both elbows. Further, Mr.

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

Related

§ 50-5-201
Tennessee § 50-5-201(a)(3)
§ 50-6-102
Tennessee § 50-6-102(12)(A)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2023 TN WC 8, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garland-jeffrey-v-city-of-savannah-tennworkcompcl-2023.