Hadzic, Admir v. Averitt Express, LLC

2015 TN WC 35
CourtTennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
DecidedApril 16, 2015
Docket2014-02-0064
StatusPublished

This text of 2015 TN WC 35 (Hadzic, Admir v. Averitt Express, LLC) 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
Hadzic, Admir v. Averitt Express, LLC, 2015 TN WC 35 (Tenn. Super. Ct. 2015).

Opinion

FILED April 16, 2015

T:-

Time : 2:32PM

COURT OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION

EMPLOYEE: ADMIR HADZIC DOCKET#: 2014-02-0064

EMPLOYER: AVERITT EXPRESS DATE OF IN.JURY: DECEMBER 8, 2014

INSURANCE CARRIER: SELF INSURED

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER

THIS CAUSE came before the undersigned Workers' Compensation Judge on March 31, 2015, upon the Request for Expedited Hearing filed by Admir Hadzic (Mr. Hadzic), the Employee, on December 14, 2014, pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-239, to determine if Averitt Express (Averitt), the Employer, is obligated to provide additional temporary disability benefits and medical benefits.

ANALYSIS

Issues

1. Whether Mr. Hadzic sustained an injury on December 8, 2014, arising primarily out of and in the course and scope of his employment with Averitt. 2. If so, whether Mr. Hadzic is entitled to medical and temporary disability benefits.

Evidence Submitted

The following witnesses testified:

• Mr. Hadzic • Mr. Rob Gox-Private Investigator • Ms. Laura Mayberry-Lost Time Adjuster.

The Court designated the following as the technical record:

• Petition for Benefit Determination • Dispute Certification Notice • Request for Expedited Hearing. The Court did not consider attachments to the above filings unless admitted into evidence during the Expedited Hearing. The Court considered factual statements in the above filings as allegations unless established by the evidence.

The Court admitted the following into evidence:

• Exhibit 1: Employer's Handbook section regarding Driver Fatigue (2 pages) • Exhibit 2: Letter from Tennessee Commissioner of Safety (1 page) • Exhibit 3: Return to work slip-Dr. Fred Knickerbocker (1 page) • Exhibit 4: Return to work slips-Dr. Jim Brasfield (2 pages) • Exhibit 5: November 3, 2014 Medical Note-Dr. Brasfield (2 pages) • Exhibit 6: Tennessee Driver Handbook, page 77 (l page) • Exhibit 7: Printouts of Various Web Sites (31 pages) (marked for identification only) • Exhibit 8: Qualcomm data pictures (6 pages) • Exhibit 9: Petition for Benefit Determination, Date oflnjury July 2, 2014 (2 pages) • Exhibit 10: Petition for Benefit Determination, Date oflnjury December 8, 2014 (2 pages) • Exhibit 11: December 8, 2014 Work Injury Statement (1 page) • Exhibit 12: Revised December 8, 2014 Work Injury Statement (1 Page) • Exhibit 13: Diagnostic Testing Reports (9 pages) • Exhibit 14: Picture of Mr. Hadzic's home (I page) • Exhibit 15: Picture ofMr. Hadzic's home (1 page) • Exhibit 16: Picture of Mr. Hadzic on lawn mower (1 page) • Exhibit 17: Picture of Mr. Hadzic on lawn mower (1 page) • Exhibit 18: Picture of Mr. Hadzic on lawn mower (1 page) • Exhibit 19: Picture of brush pile in Mr. Hadzic's yard (1 page) • Exhibit 20: Picture of Mr. Hadzic using clippers (l page) • Exhibit 21: Picture ofMr. Hadzic using clippers (1 page) • Exhibit 22: Affidavit of Joseph Gordon (3 pages) • Exhibit 23: Video of Mr. Hadzic October 2014 • Exhibit 24: Video of Mr. Hadzic December 11-13, 2014 • Exhibit 25: Affidavit of Laura Newberry (4 pages) • Exhibit 26: Disability Payment Ledger and light-duty hours Mr. Hadzic worked following the July 2, 2014 injury (7 pages) • Exhibit 27: Notice of Denial Letter dated December 15, 2014 (1 page) • Exhibit 28: First Report oflnjury-Date oflnjury December 8, 2014 (1 page) • Exhibit 29: July 2, 2014 Work Injury Statement (1 page) • Exhibit 30: Medical Records-Dr. Robert Detroye (4 pages) • Exhibit 31: Work Status Report-Dr. Richard Duncan (1 page) • Exhibit 32: Medical Record- Dr. Richard Duncan (1 page) • Exhibit 33: Medical Record- Dr. Jim Brasfield (2 pages) • Exhibit 34: Diagnostic Testing Reports (2 pages).

2 History of Claim

Mr. Hadzic, a truck-driver for Averitt, alleged an injury to his arm, chest, and lower body while lifting his personal cooler into his work truck on Averitt's property on December 8, 2014 (Exhibits 11-12). Prior to this incident, Mr. Hadzic alleged an injury to his upper back, right shoulder, right arm, and the right side of his neck on July 2, 2014, as he turned the landing gear handle on a trailer (Exhibit 29). Averitt authorized Drs. Fred Knickerbocker, Jim Brasfield, Richard Duncan, and Robert Detroye to treat Mr. Hadzic's complaints following the July 2, 2014 incident.

Mr. Hadzic disagreed with Averitt's handling ofhis July 2014 incident. Mr. Hadzic wanted treatment for his low back, but Averitt limited treatment to his upper back (Exhibit 32). Diagnostic testing indicated degenerative problems in the cervical spine with no known etiology for his right side radiculopathy (Exhibit 34, page 2). Dr. Brasfield noted a normal EMG/NVC and further noted that Mr. Hadzic had not suffered a cervical injury due to the incident on July 2, 2014, but rather suffered an injury to his shoulder (Exhibit 33, page 1). He released Mr. Hadzic to work from a neurosurgical standpoint on November 24,2014 (Exhibit 4, pages 1-2). Dr. Brasfield opined that Mr. Hadzic's orthopedic doctors should address his shoulder injury (Ex. 33, page 1).

A nurse case manager took the information from Dr. Brasfield to Dr. Knickerbocker. Dr. Knickerbocker, an orthopedic physician, treated Mr. Hadzic for his July 2, 2014 work injury. Dr. Knickerbocker released Mr. Hadzic to return to work without restrictions on November 24, 2014 (Exhibit. 3).

Following the July 2, 2014 incident, Averitt hired private investigators to observe and record Mr. Hadzic' s activities. Surveillance demonstrated Mr. Hadzic driving his riding lawn mower, using a rake to hold a large pile of brush, and using garden clippers (Exhibits 16-18 and 20-23). Mr. Hadzic worked light duty at the American Red Cross following the July 2, 2014 incident, and Averitt paid him temporary partial disability benefits (Exhibit 26).

Following his return to work, Averitt dispatched Mr. Hadzic to deliver a load beginning December 8, 2014. At home, in preparation for the assignment, Mr. Hadzic packed a large cooler with food. Mr. Hadzic estimated the cooler weighed sixty (60) pounds (Exhibit 12). Mr. Hadzic's daughter placed the cooler in Mr. Hadzic's personal vehicle because she was afraid he would injure himself if he lifted it. Upon arrival at Averitt's site, Mr. Hadzic lifted the cooler out of his personal vehicle and attempted to place it in his work truck when the alleged injury occurred. Mr. Hadzic also lifted his personal GPS and maps from his personal vehicle to put into his work vehicle but did not suffer an injury lifting those items.

Averitt initially provided medical treatment for the alleged December 8, 2014 injury. The hospital physicians ordered diagnostic tests, which indicated degenerative changes but no acute abnormalities or fractures (Exhibit 13 ). Following Mr. Hadzic' s initial treatment, Averitt denied the claim on the basis that his injury was not work-related. Mr. Hadzic has not worked since December 8, 2014.

Mr. Hadzic's Petition for Benefit Determination (PBD) requested temporary disability

3 benefits and medical benefits. The parties did not reach an agreement on the issues. This matter came before the Court on March 31, 2015.

Mr. Hadzic's Contentions

Mr. Hadzic contends that he injured his arm, chest, and lower body while lifting his personal cooler from his personal vehicle into his work truck on Averitt's property on December 8, 2014. He acknowledged Averitt did not require him to bring a cooler to work. He brought it because he feels it allows him to timely deliver his loads and would be helpful in case of an emergency. He contends he cannot drive in and out of truck stops very well because he drives a large truck.

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

Related

McCall v. National Health Corp.
100 S.W.3d 209 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2015 TN WC 35, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hadzic-admir-v-averitt-express-llc-tennworkcompcl-2015.