Joseph Satterfield v. Walmart Associates, Inc.

CourtIntermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia
DecidedApril 29, 2025
Docket24-ica-323
StatusPublished

This text of Joseph Satterfield v. Walmart Associates, Inc. (Joseph Satterfield v. Walmart Associates, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Intermediate Court of Appeals of West Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Joseph Satterfield v. Walmart Associates, Inc., (W. Va. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA

FILED JOSEPH SATTERFIELD, April 29, 2025 Claimant Below, Petitioner ASHLEY N. DEEM, CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA v.) No. 24-ICA-323 (JCN: 2023010236)

WALMART ASSOCIATES, INC., Employer Below, Respondent

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Petitioner Joseph Satterfield appeals the June 17, 2024, order of the Workers’ Compensation Board of Review (“Board”). Respondent Walmart Associates, Inc., (“Walmart”) filed a timely response.1 Petitioner did not file a reply brief. The issue on appeal is whether the Board erred in affirming the claim administrator’s order granting temporary total disability (“TTD”) benefits only from October 31, 2022, through November 6, 2022.

This Court has jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to West Virginia Code § 51- 11-4 (2024). After considering the parties’ arguments, the record on appeal, and the applicable law, this Court finds no substantial question of law and no prejudicial error. For these reasons, a memorandum decision affirming the Board’s order is appropriate under Rule 21 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure.

On October 31, 2022, while employed by Walmart, Mr. Satterfield injured his left shoulder while lifting an item. Mr. Satterfield filed a workers’ compensation claim for a left shoulder injury. Vijay R. Randive, M.D., treated Mr. Satterfield for his injury on October 31, 2022, and diagnosed an acute sprain of the left shoulder; Dr. Randive took Mr. Satterfield off work for the next two days. On November 7, 2022, Mr. Satterfield saw Walter C. Boardwine, D.O., for his left shoulder. Dr. Boardwine noted that Mr. Satterfield suffered an injury to his shoulder the previous week. Dr. Boardwine commented that Mr. Satterfield previously underwent a labral repair in September of 2021 and noted that he suffered a reinjury while lifting at work. Dr. Boardwine assessed a sprain of the left shoulder associated with lifting, chronic and acute subluxation of the left shoulder joint, and chronic bicipital tendinitis in the left shoulder. Although Dr. Boardwine ordered physical therapy, he released Mr. Satterfield to return to work at light duty.

1 Mr. Satterfield is self-represented. Walmart is represented by H. Dill Battle III, Esq. 1 On December 5, 2022, Dr. Boardwine examined Mr. Satterfield, who complained of sharp pain in his left shoulder. At this visit, Dr. Boardwine diagnosed chronic bicipital tendinitis of the left shoulder and chronic subluxation of left shoulder joint. An MRI was ordered to determine if Mr. Satterfield retore his prior labral repair, although Dr. Boardwine opined that the problem could be in the bicipital groove region. The MRI, performed on December 8, 2022, revealed a superior labral tear and signal abnormalities in the glenoid that were possibly postoperative changes. The biceps tendon and the rotator cuff were unremarkable.

On December 12, 2022, Dr. Boardwine reviewed the MRI and said that some superior labral issues noted in the MRI had been seen at the time Mr. Satterfield had surgery and it was believed that there was a congenital anomaly at that time. Dr. Boardwine noted continued biceps tendinitis and possible instability or chronic tearing at the groove. Further, Dr. Boardwine mentioned that a diagnostic arthroscopy could be used to make the diagnosis. After an eight-month gap in treatment, on August 14, 2023, Dr. Boardwine saw Mr. Satterfield, who explained that he had been contesting a workers’ compensation decision, but he continued to have pain in the biceps tendon. Dr. Boardwine continued to assess left shoulder chronic bicipital tendinitis, but he also added that there was probably a biceps anchor problem or instability of the tendon and that such conditions are usually diagnosed with arthroscopy. Importantly, Mr. Satterfield reported that he had been working modified duty with a lifting limit of no more than five pounds, and no overhead use or climbing and that he did not feel that he could work full duty. Dr. Boardwine continued the work restrictions.

On November 7, 2023, the Board issued its order reversing the claim administrator’s order and holding the claim compensable for a left shoulder sprain/strain. The Board relied on reports by Dr. Randive, dated October 31, 2022, and Dr. Boardwine dated November 7, 2022, as the basis for its ruling that Mr. Satterfield had sustained a sprain/strain injury to his left shoulder as the result of lifting at work. In addition to holding the claim compensable for a left shoulder sprain/strain, the Board remanded the claim to the claim administrator, directing it to issue a protestable order addressing Mr. Satterfield’s entitlement to TTD benefits.

On November 14, 2023, the claim administrator issued a notice acknowledging that the Board had reversed its order dated December 23, 2022, and held the claim compensable for a left shoulder strain. Also on November 14, 2023, the claim administrator issued an order in which it granted TTD benefits from October 31, 2022, through November 6, 2022, based on Dr. Boardwine’s findings. The order explained that Dr. Boardwine certified that Mr. Satterfield could return to work at light duty effective November 7, 2022. Mr. Satterfield protested this order to the Board.

Dr. Boardwine next saw Mr. Satterfield on January 9, 2024. Mr. Satterfield reported that his claim had been approved and that he had not worked since Dr. Boardwine saw him

2 “last year.” Dr. Boardwine’s impression was that Mr. Satterfield had either a SLAP lesion, instability of the biceps in the groove, or chronic tendinitis of the biceps. Although possible surgery was mentioned, Dr. Boardwine planned to request approval for physical therapy. Dr. Boardwine did not comment on Mr. Satterfield’s work duty status or restrictions.

On January 26, 2024, Patty Yokum, Walmart’s personnel lead, wrote to Mr. Satterfield advising him to sign a temporary alternative duty assignment (“TAD”) form and bring it with him when he returned to work on January 26, 2024. A Walmart manager completed a portion of the TAD form and indicated that on November 7, 2022, Dr. Boardwine released Mr. Satterfield to light duty work with restrictions on overhead lifting, climbing, and use of ladders. Walmart assigned Mr. Satterfield to a position answering phones and he was to report to work on January 29, 2024. Mr. Satterfield signed the form indicating his acceptance of the TAD position.

By order dated June 17, 2024, the Board affirmed the claim administrator’s order granting TTD benefits from October 31, 2022, through November 6, 2022, finding that Mr. Satterfield failed to show that he was entitled to additional TTD benefits as a result of his compensable injury. The Board found that the medical evidence revealed that Mr. Satterfield was released to light duty work on November 7, 2022, and the Board found no medical evidence that he was taken off work again after November 7, 2022. The Board emphasized that Mr. Satterfield said that he worked forty hours per week until July 14, 2023, when he returned from a vacation and found that Mr. Satterfield would not be entitled to any TTD during the time he worked light duty. The Board also addressed Mr. Satterfield’s argument that he should be compensated for lost wages from August 21, 2023, through January 24, 2024, when Walmart either reduced his work hours or took him off work altogether. The Board found no evidence of record to corroborate Mr. Satterfield’s assertion that his hours were cut or that he was taken off work as a result of his left shoulder sprain/strain. The Board found no evidence indicating that a doctor took him off work during that time. Mr. Satterfield appeals this order.

Our standard of review is set forth in West Virginia Code § 23-5-12a(b) (2022), in part, as follows:

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

Related

§ 23-4
West Virginia § 23-4
§ 23-4-1c
West Virginia § 23-4-1c
§ 23-4-7a
West Virginia § 23-4-7a(e)
§ 23-5-12a
West Virginia § 23-5-12a(b)
§ 51
West Virginia § 51

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Joseph Satterfield v. Walmart Associates, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joseph-satterfield-v-walmart-associates-inc-wvactapp-2025.