McVey, Karen v. Child Care, USA

2016 TN WC 86
CourtTennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
DecidedApril 15, 2016
Docket2016-06-0150
StatusPublished

This text of 2016 TN WC 86 (McVey, Karen v. Child Care, USA) 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
McVey, Karen v. Child Care, USA, 2016 TN WC 86 (Tenn. Super. Ct. 2016).

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS AT NASHVILLE

KAREN S. MCVEY, ) Docket No.: 2016-06-0150 Employee, ) v. ) State File Number: 4244-2016 CHILD CARE, USA, ) Employer, ) Judge Joshua Davis Baker And ) THE HARTFORD, ) Carrier. ) )

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER DENYING TEMPORARY DISABILITY BENEFITS (FILE REVIEW ONLY)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard before the Court upon the request for expedited hearing filed by the employee, Karen McVey, pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-239 (2015). Ms. McVey requested that this Court issue a ruling on her request for expedited hearing based on a review of the documents in the case file, pursuant to Tennessee Compilation Rules and Regulations 0800-02-21-.14(1)(c) (2015). The Court finds it has sufficient information to issue an order based on a review of the file.

Through this expedited hearing, Ms. McVey seeks temporary disability, medical benefits and mileage reimbursement for travel to medical appointments. According to the claim file, however, the employer, Child Care USA (CCUSA), provided Ms. McVey medical care through workers’ compensation. The only issues to be determined, therefore, are whether Ms. McVey can recover temporary disability benefits and mileage reimbursement. As explained below, the Court finds Ms. McVey is unlikely to proceed at a hearing on the merits in proving entitlement to temporary disability benefits or mileage reimbursement at this time.1

1 A complete list of the documents the Court considered in rendering its decision is attached as an appendix to this order. History of Claim

The Court derived the following claim history from the documentary evidence contained within the claim file. The file, however, contains no affidavits or sworn statements from either party. Accordingly, with the exception of the medical record contents, the Court developed this history through the parties’ allegations.

Ms. McVey is a sixty-five-year-old resident of Davidson County, Tennessee, who worked as a child-care provider for CCUSA. According to her handwritten statements/correspondence, Ms. McVey injured her right upper-thigh area in the course and scope of her employment for CCUSA on October 7 or 8, 2015, when a child jumped on her back while Ms. McVey was bent over cleaning a shelf.2 (Appx. at 8.) Ms. McVey reported the incident to her supervisor the following day and returned to work. Id. at 1. She worked the remainder of the week, but her condition did not improve. Id.

After resting over the weekend, Ms. McVey’s leg became so painful she could not work. Id. She called CCUSA on Monday morning—October 12, 2015—to tell her supervisor she needed to rest her leg another day. Id. According to Ms. McVey, her supervisor told her she needed a doctor’s note if she intended to miss work; CCUSA did not offer her a panel at that time. Id. Ms. McVey went on her own to a CVS Pharmacy clinic for treatment. Id. In one of her handwritten statements, Ms. McVey stated she returned to work on October 27, 2015, and CCUSA terminated her that same day. Id.

In her written statements, Ms. McVey claimed CCUSA terminated her because her supervisor wanted her “gone.” Id. at 1. CCUSA disputes the reason for termination, maintaining it terminated Ms. McVey because she could not keep track of the number of children in her class. Id. at 10.

CCUSA provided Ms. McVey a panel, and she chose to treat at Vanderbilt Orthopaedic Institute. Id. at 9. She began treating with Dr. Robert Fitch on January 26, 2016. Id. at 17. Dr. Fitch took x-rays of Ms. McVey’s right leg, which revealed right- knee osteoarthritis but no problems with her right femur. Id. at 6, 17. Dr. Fitch diagnosed a right-hamstring strain and referred Ms. McVey for physical therapy. Id. at 17.

Ms. McVey began physical therapy at Vanderbilt on January 28, 2016. Id. at 5. She had three physical therapy sessions. Id.

Although CCUSA has not denied the claim, it has concerns about compensability. In its February 17, 2016 letter to Mediating Specialist Clinton Powell, CCUSA stated the video evidence from the date of injury does not corroborate Ms. McVey’s version of

2 In one written statement, Ms. McVey claimed she injured her left leg.

2 events. Id. at 10. Additionally, CCUSA could not confirm the incident’s occurrence through other investigative means. Id. CCUSA, however, did not raise compensability as a defense in this proceeding but stated it intends to introduce the video at a later hearing, if necessary. Id.

Ms. McVey filed a Petition for Benefit Determination seeking temporary disability and medical benefits. Id. at 1. The parties failed to reach an agreement during mediation and the Mediating Specialist filed a Dispute Certification Notice. Id. at 2. Ms. McVey then filed a request for expedited hearing and asked this Court to issue a ruling based on its review of the documents in the file without holding an evidentiary hearing. Id at 3. The clerk notified CCUSA of Ms. McVey’s request. CCUSA did not object to proceeding without an evidentiary hearing.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

The Court considered the following legal principles in rendering decision on Ms. McVey’s expedited hearing request. Ms. McVey has the burden of proving all essential elements of her case including her entitlement to temporary disability benefits and mileage reimbursement. See Tenn. Code. Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(6) (2015); Tindall v. Waring Park Ass’n, 725 S.W.2d 935, 937 (Tenn. 1987); Scott v. Integrity Staffing Solutions, No. 2015-01-0055, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 24, at *6 (Tenn. Workers’ Comp. App. Bd. Aug. 18, 2015). She does not, however, need to prove every element of her claim by a preponderance of the evidence in order to obtain relief at an expedited hearing. McCord v. Advantage Human Resourcing, No. 2014-06-0063, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 6, at *7-8, 9 (Tenn. Workers’ Comp. App. Bd., Mar. 27, 2015). Instead, she has the burden to come forward with sufficient evidence from which the trial court can determine that the employee is likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits. Id. As explained herein, the Court finds Ms. McVey failed to carry her burden of proof and, therefore, cannot recover temporary disability benefits or mileage reimbursement.

Ms. McVey presented no sworn testimony or affidavits to support her claim for temporary disability and medical benefits. The rules governing expedited hearings require an employee to provide an affidavit in conjunction with an expedited hearing or its request is subject to denial upon objection of the opposing party. See Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. 0800-02-21-.14(1)(a) (2015); Hadzic v. Averitt Express, No. 2014-02-0064, 2015 TN Wrk Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 14 (Tenn. Workers’ Comp. App. Bd., May 18, 2015), In this case, however, CCUSA did not object to proceeding on the request for expedited hearing despite Ms. McVey’s omission of an affidavit. Accordingly, this Court proceeded to review the file and issue a ruling based on its contents.

Concerning Ms. McVey’s request for medical benefits, the Court finds it is not well-taken because CCUSA provided Ms. McVey a panel of physicians and she received

3 treatment with her chosen physician group of Vanderbilt Orthopaedic Institute. Id. at 17. Accordingly, CCUSA satisfied its obligation to provide Ms. McVey medical treatment under the Workers’ Compensation Law. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-204(a)(1)(A) & (a)(3)(A)(i) (2015).3 Furthermore, Ms. McVey provided no information showing she failed to receive any reasonable and necessary care from her chosen physician. For these reasons, the Court finds Ms.

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

Related

Gray v. Cullom MacHine, Tool & Die, Inc.
152 S.W.3d 439 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 2004)
Carter v. First Source Furniture Group
92 S.W.3d 367 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 2002)
Gluck Brothers, Inc. v. Coffey
431 S.W.2d 756 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1968)
Tindall v. Waring Park Ass'n
725 S.W.2d 935 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1987)
Simpson v. Satterfield
564 S.W.2d 953 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1978)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2016 TN WC 86, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcvey-karen-v-child-care-usa-tennworkcompcl-2016.