McLeod, Kamden v. Valet Guys of Knoxville, LLC

2024 TN WC 40
CourtTennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
DecidedMay 13, 2024
Docket2023-03-00663
StatusPublished

This text of 2024 TN WC 40 (McLeod, Kamden v. Valet Guys of Knoxville, 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
McLeod, Kamden v. Valet Guys of Knoxville, LLC, 2024 TN WC 40 (Tenn. Super. Ct. 2024).

Opinion

FILED May 13, 2024 12:45 PM(CT) TENNESSEE COURT OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS

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

KAMDEN MCLEOD, ) Docket Number: 2023-03-00663 Employee, ) v. ) State File Number: 860055-2023 VALET GUYS OF KNOXVILLE, ) LLC, ) Judge Brian K. Addington Employer. )

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER GRANTING BENEFITS

The Court held an expedited hearing on May 2, 2024, on Mr. McLeod’s requests for medical and temporary disability benefits for his December 2022 work injury. Valet Guys disputed that Mr. McLeod’s current condition is related to his injury. For the reasons below, the Court holds Mr. McLeod is entitled to the requested medical treatment, including surgery, and temporary total disability benefits.

Claim History

Mr. McLeod slipped on asphalt and injured his right arm and shoulder at work on December 28, 2022. Valet Guys accepted the claim, and Mr. McLeod received medical treatment from Dr. Joshua Moss, who repaired Mr. McLeod’s torn rotator cuff and bicep tear.1

After surgery, Dr. Moss ordered physical therapy, but Mr. McLeod continued to experience pain. He returned to Dr. Moss and reported hearing a pop in his shoulder while showering. Dr. Moss’s nurse noted an abnormality in his bicep and ordered an MRI. At first, the radiologist who read the MRI and Dr. Moss disagreed on the results. The radiologist initially diagnosed a recurrent rotator cuff tear, but after discussing the MRI with Dr. Moss, they concluded no retear occurred.2 Dr. Moss recommended additional 1 The parties agreed that Valet Guys paid medical and temporary disability benefits and/or regular wages through May 31, 2023. 2 The MRI report was amended and stated, “no recurrent rotator cuff tear” in the addendum.

1 physical therapy and continued five-pound lifting restrictions. Valet Guys continued to pay medical benefits until Mr. McLeod moved to North Carolina.

In North Carolina, Mr. McLeod attended three physical therapy sessions and sought treatment from Orthopedist Dr. Eric Lescault on his own.3 Dr. Lescault ordered a CT arthrogram scan and thought Mr. McLeod may have another rotator cuff tear. He suggested surgery to rule it out or repair the tear. He also restricted Mr. McLeod from work on July 31, 2023, until his next examination or surgery was performed. Mr. McLeod testified that he was unable to return to Dr. Lescault for financial reasons and Valet Guys declined to pay for the treatment.

Although Valet Guys provided work or continued his wages until May 31, it terminated Mr. McLeod in January, when he crashed a van at work. After the accident was reported, Mr. McLeod denied that he was responsible. Valet Guys obtained video of the incident, which showed that Mr. McLeod crashed the van. Mr. McLeod continued to deny the incident after Valet Guys showed him the video, so Valet Guys terminated him.

During the expedited hearing, Mr. McLeod testified that his injury has kept him from working. He had planned to start working for FedEx in North Carolina, but his injury prevented it. He stated he has been unable to work since he moved, that his arm is disfigured from the injury, and he has constant pain.

Jerry Kruse, co-owner of Valet Guys, testified that it stopped paying medical benefits because he was not going to approve treatment without getting copies of Mr. McLeod’s medical records. He wanted the records to determine if Mr. McLeod had reinjured his arm by lifting heavy items during his move to North Carolina. He felt Mr. McLeod had a new injury.

In preparation for the hearing, the parties deposed both Drs. Moss and Lescault.

Dr. Moss did not diagnose a recurrent tear. He testified that the MRI findings were “typical postsurgical,” and that Mr. McLeod had an “intact repair.” When asked whether Mr. McLeod had suffered a new injury or if his pain was the result of his previous surgery, Dr. Moss responded, “it could be either.” He added, “It could be something as simple as reaching out to steady [himself] getting out of the shower, something like that.”

Dr. Lescault testified,

3 Mr. McLeod first saw Dr. John Azzato on June 13. Dr. Azzato referred him to Dr. Lescault’s office and restricted him from work beginning June 13 through June 30. Valet Guys did not pay for the physical therapy or doctor visits.

2 [W]e have a pretty good idea from the CT arthrogram that there’s a recurrent tear, and that tear could be a non-healed portion of the cuff repair, if could be a propagation of the previous tear, which means the tear got bigger, or it could even be a new tear adjacent to the repair.

He stated that surgery was warranted when a patient continues to have pain 12 weeks after surgery, as in Mr. McLeod’s case.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

Mr. McLeod must prove he is likely to prevail at a final hearing on his requested benefits. Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(1) (2023); McCord v. Advantage Human Resourcing, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 6, at *7-8, 9 (Mar. 27, 2015).

Tennessee Workers’ Compensation law requires an employer to “furnish, free of charge to the employee, such medical and surgical treatment . . . made reasonably necessary by accident[.]” Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-204(a)(1)(A).

Valet Guys did not offer Mr. McLeod a panel of physicians when he was in Knoxville or North Carolina. Therefore, the presumption on causation for panel physicians under section 50-6-102(12)(E) does not apply.

Valet Guys theorized that Mr. McLeod suffered a new injury by lifting heavy objects when he moved. Mr. McLeod testified that he did not, and Valet Guys offered no direct testimony or medical proof to contradict him.

Rather, at this point, both doctors have differing opinions of what caused Mr. McLeod’s current condition. It could be something as simple as reaching out his arm. Dr. Moss relied solely on the MRI showing no new tear, and he and the radiologist originally disagreed about a recurrent tear. Dr. Lescault requested an additional test, which in his opinion shows another tear. Because Dr. Lescault based his opinion on more complete information, and because he stated that after 13 weeks, Mr. McLeod should not be having pain after surgery, the Court credits his testimony over Dr. Moss’s.

For these reasons, the Court concludes Mr. McLeod is likely to prevail in proving that his current condition primarily arose out of his injury and surgery is needed.

3 Mr. McLeod seeks temporary disability benefits from June 1, 2023, to present. To award these benefits, an injured worker must establish: “(1) that he or she became disabled from working due to a compensable injury; (2) that there is a causal connection between the injury and the inability to work; and (3) the duration of the period of disability.” Jones v. Crencor Leasing and Sales, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 48, at *7 (Dec. 11, 2015). However, an injured employee is not entitled to temporary partial disability benefits if he was terminated for misconduct. Id. at *8.

The Court holds Mr. McLeod is not entitled to temporary partial disability benefits from June 1-12, 2023, because he was terminated for misconduct. Valet Guys had cause to terminate him because he refused to acknowledge that he crashed their van. Id.

However, he is entitled temporary total disability under Jones. Both Dr. Azzato and Dr. Lescault restricted Mr. McLeod from work beginning June 13. Dr. Lescault took him off work until he has surgery, which has not been performed. Further, Mr. McLeod was unable to return to Dr.

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

Related

§ 50-6-204
Tennessee § 50-6-204(a)(1)(A)
§ 50-6-239
Tennessee § 50-6-239(d)(1)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2024 TN WC 40, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcleod-kamden-v-valet-guys-of-knoxville-llc-tennworkcompcl-2024.