Jett, Kimsue v. CBC Group, Inc., Cgristian Brands, Inc.

2021 TN WC 170
CourtTennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
DecidedApril 7, 2021
Docket2020-05-0851
StatusPublished

This text of 2021 TN WC 170 (Jett, Kimsue v. CBC Group, Inc., Cgristian Brands, 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
Jett, Kimsue v. CBC Group, Inc., Cgristian Brands, Inc., 2021 TN WC 170 (Tenn. Super. Ct. 2021).

Opinion

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

AT MURFREESBORO KIMSUE JETT, ) Docket No. 2020-05-0851 Employee, ) v. ) ) CBC GROUP, INC., ) State File No. 120191-2019 CHRISTIAN BRANDS, INC., ) Employer, ) And ) ) DEPOSITORS INSURANCE CoO., ) Judge Dale Tipps Insurance Carrier. )

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER GRANTING MEDICAL BENEFITS (DECISION ON THE RECORD)

Ms. Jett’s request for medical and temporary disability benefits came before the Court on March 30, 2021, for an Expedited Hearing on the record.' The central legal issue is whether Ms. Jett is likely to prove at a hearing on the merits that her injury arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of her employment. For the reasons below, the Court cannot find she is likely to prove this, but holds Ms. Jett is entitled to a return visit to her treating doctor.

History of Claim While working for CBC on December 26, 2019, Ms. Jett tripped and fell. A coworker witnessed the fall and reported that she hit her head. CBC provided a panel of physicians, from which Ms. Jett selected Fast Pace Medical Clinic.

Ms. Jett saw Family Nurse Practitioner (FNP) Brianna Ridley on the date of the

' CBC filed a response opposing a hearing on the record, but the Court determined that a review of the written materials without an evidentiary hearing was appropriate and issued a Docketing Notice. In response, CBC filed a position statement, but neither party filed any objections.

1 accident. Ms. Ridley noted complaints of a constant headache after hitting the right side of the head on concrete. She anticipated a full recovery and assigned work restrictions for one day.

Ms. Jett returned to Fast Pace on January 3. She reported that her head had improved, but her upper arm was “really sore” and was keeping her awake at night. She received a prescription for meloxicam and was told to follow up in a week. When Ms. Jett returned on January 10, FNP Katherine Ring noted joint pain and swelling, and reduced range of motion. She referred Ms. Jett to an orthopedic specialist.

CBC provided no further benefits and filed a Notice of Controversy several weeks later, so Ms. Jett sought treatment from Dr. Jeffrey Adams. He surgically repaired a partial- thickness rotator cuff tear and a torn biceps tendon on June 10 and took her off work for at least ten weeks. Dr. Adams did not specify the cause of Ms. Jett’s injury.

Ms. Jett stated in her affidavit that her shoulder has not healed properly and she has been unable to work since January 3, 2020. She requested additional treatment with Dr. Adams. She also seeks payment of her medical bills, rermbursement of her out-of-pocket medical expenses, and temporary disability benefits.

CBC contended that Ms. Jett is not entitled to benefits because she did not prove that her injury was primarily caused by work.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Standard applied

Ms. Jett must provide sufficient evidence from which this Court might determine she is likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(1) (2020); McCord v. Advantage Human Resourcing, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 6, at *7-8, 9 (Mar. 27, 2015).

Causation

To prove a compensable injury, Ms. Jett must show that her alleged injuries arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of her employment. This includes the requirement that she 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.” “Shown to a reasonable degree of medical certainty” means that, in the opinion of the treating physician, it is more likely than not considering all causes as opposed to speculation or possibility. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50- 6-102(14). CBC acknowledges Ms. Jett slipped and fell on December 26. Therefore, the Court holds she is likely to show a specific incident, identifiable by time and place, at trial.

The question then is whether Ms. Jett appears likely to prove at a hearing on the merits that her work was the primary cause of the injury and need for treatment. The Court cannot find at this time that she is likely to meet this burden. Although Dr. Adams’s records mention her workplace fall, he did not specifically address the cause of Ms. Jett’s condition. Without a medical opinion on this issue, the Court cannot find at this time that she is likely to prove “to a reasonable degree of medical certainty” that her work “contributed more than fifty percent (50%) in causing the . . . disablement or need for medical treatment, considering all causes.” This finding, however, does not end the inquiry.

At an expedited hearing, if an employee presents sufficient evidence that a work event resulted in injury, this may support an order compelling an employer to provide a panel. See Lewis v. Molly Maid, 2016 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 19, at *8-9 (Apr. 20, 2016). Thus, the question is whether Ms. Jett provided sufficient evidence to satisfy her burden at this interlocutory stage that she is entitled to a panel of physicians or, as she requested, treatment with Dr. Adams.

Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-204(a)(3)(A)(i) requires that, “in any case when the employee has suffered an injury and expressed a need for medical care, the employer shall designate a group of three (3) or more independent reputable physicians . . . from which the injured employee shall select one (1) to be the treating physician.” The administrative rules also require an employer to provide a panel no later than three days after an employee expresses a need for medical care. Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. 0800-02- 01-.06(1) (May, 2018). An employer who fails to comply with this rule may be assessed a civil penalty. Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. 0800-02-01-.10.

Here, CBC provided Ms. Jett a panel after her incident, and she chose Fast Pace. However, after Fast Pace referred her to an orthopedist, CBC denied the claim because Ms. Jett “did not report any injury to her right shoulder at the time of the incident.” CBC also suggested that Ms. Jett suffered from a preexisting degenerative shoulder condition but presented no evidence to support this argument. The Court finds both arguments unpersuasive.

Regarding Ms. Jett’s failure to “timely” report her shoulder injury, she gave notice of this injury within the fifteen-day requirement of Tennessee Code Annotated section 50- 6-201, as she reported it to her medical provider on January 3, only eight days after her work accident. Further, Ms. Jett fell and hit the right side of her head on a concrete floor hard enough to cause her coworker to be concerned about a concussion and advise her to seek medical help. On her second visit to the panel provider, just one week later, she reported problems with her right arm and shoulder that had been interfering with her sleep. Those problems persisted until she was referred to an orthopedist. Under these

3 circumstances, the Court cannot find that Ms. Jett’s failure to immediately report an injury to her shoulder should terminate her right to medical treatment.

Concerning the argument that Ms. Jett suffered from a preexisting degenerative shoulder condition, CBC presented no evidence to support it. However, even if it had evidence, it would not be excused from its statutory duty to provide medical treatment once it received notice of a work injury. The Court is constrained to the record before it because “judges, like lawyers, are poorly positioned to formulate expert medical opinions.” Love v. Delta Faucet Co., 2016 TN Wrk.

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

Related

GAF Building Materials v. George
47 S.W.3d 430 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2021 TN WC 170, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jett-kimsue-v-cbc-group-inc-cgristian-brands-inc-tennworkcompcl-2021.