Odem, Abul v. Tyson Foods

2016 TN WC 283
CourtTennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
DecidedNovember 29, 2016
Docket2016-06-0657
StatusPublished

This text of 2016 TN WC 283 (Odem, Abul v. Tyson Foods) 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
Odem, Abul v. Tyson Foods, 2016 TN WC 283 (Tenn. Super. Ct. 2016).

Opinion

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

ABDUL ODEM, ) Docket No. 2016-06-0657 Employee, ) v. ) State File No. 26740-2016 TYSON FOODS, ) Employer. ) Judge Joshua Davis Baker

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER DENYING TEMPORARY DISABILITY AND MEDICAL BENEFITS

This claim came before the Court on November 3, 2016, on the Request for Expedited Hearing (REH) filed by Abdul Odem pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-239 (2015). At issue is Mr. Odem’s entitlement to temporary total disability and medical benefits for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). The parties do not dispute that Mr. Odem suffered from bilateral CTS. However, Tyson Foods has raised lack of notice and compensability as defenses. Based on the proof before it, the Court denies Mr. Odem’s claim for temporary disability and medical benefits at this time.1

History of Claim

In June 2015, Mr. Odem began working as a truck loader in Tyson’s food processing plant. His duties mainly included using a pallet jack to transport boxes of food from the packaging area to the shipping area. Mr. Odem explained that the pallet jack, or “mule,” had a throttle that he had to constantly manipulate while driving several miles through the plant each day. He stated that, after working in that position for approximately a month to a month and a half, he began experiencing pain, numbness, throbbing and burning in both hands. He even experienced the pain in his sleep and testified that sometimes he slept only two or three hours and other times he did not sleep. Due to a work schedule that provided him three consecutive days off each week, Mr. Odem testified he worked with the pain for four days and then saw a doctor and “healed up” over his three days off.

1 A complete listing of the technical record and exhibits admitted at the Expedited Hearing is attached to this Order as an appendix. On October 15, Mr. Odem sought treatment through his private insurance from Dr. Philip Coogan. Dr. Coogan diagnosed Mr. Odem with severe bilateral CTS and administered several cortisone shots before scheduling surgery for March 18, 2016. Because the pain was severe, Dr. Coogan advanced the surgery date and performed the operation on March 4. (Ex. 1 at 1.)

In a medical note prepared several weeks after surgery, Dr. Coogan wrote the following concerning the cause of Mr. Odem’s bilateral CTS: “The patient describes moving thousands of the cases a day, 32 cases per pallet, 30 pallets per truck and 4 to 6 trucks a day. I believe it is the arithmetic. This certainly sounds like it could be a significant contributor to his current complaints.” (Ex. 1 at 7.)

Mr. Odem did not report his condition to Tyson as work-related until after he had surgery. (Ex. 5.) Just prior to his surgery, Mr. Odem told Crystal Whitelaw, a Tyson human resources employee, that he would need to be out to have surgery. In an affidavit, Ms. Whitelaw stated Mr. Odem visited her to inquire about receiving short-term disability benefits. (Ex. 9 at 1.) Mr. Odem agreed he did not tell Ms. Whitelaw that the surgery could be related to his work for Tyson at that time.

Mr. Odem gave several reasons for failing to report his bilateral CTS to Tyson. He first testified he did not know he had to report the condition to a supervisor. However, on cross-examination he acknowledged receiving notification of his duty to report a workplace injury when his employment with Tyson ensued. (Exs. 10, 11.) He then stated that he did not want to miss work because of his injury. He described his job as “competitive,” and feared he could lose it if he had to take time off for treatment. However, after he learned he would have to miss work for an extended period to recover, Mr. Odem stated he had no choice but to report his condition to Tyson.

After he reported his condition, Tyson provided Mr. Odem a panel of physicians. On March 15, he selected Dr. C. Robinson Dyer. (Ex. 8 at 3.) Dr. Dyer declined to treat Mr. Odem, so he next selected Dr. David Moore from the same panel. Id. at 2. Dr. Moore also declined to treat him, so he selected the last physician remaining on the panel, Dr. Steve Salyers. Id. at 1. Mr. Odem also signed a form acknowledging he received the panel and selected a physician from it. (Ex. 14.)

Dr. Salyers saw Mr. Odem only one time for an examination. Mr. Odem described the examination as very brief, lasting only three minutes. In the medical report from that visit he wrote:

Severe carpal tunnel syndrome would not develop in the two to three months that he had worked for [sic] at Tyson doing that particular job. I can state that with greater than 51% reasonable degree of medical certainty. In short, under the Tennessee statute, I do not think there is an established

2 causal relationship between his occupation exposure and his carpal tunnel syndrome. A much more likely causal fact is his 290 pound weight and morbid obesity.

(Ex. 1 at 28.) Given the results of the examination, Dr. Salyers declined to provide further care for Mr. Odem.

After receiving the causation opinion from Dr. Salyers, Tyson denied the claim. (Ex. 6.) Thereafter, Mr. Odem filed a Petition for Benefit Determination seeking medical and temporary disability benefits. (T.R. 1 at 1.) After the parties failed to resolve their disputes through mediation, the mediator issued a Dispute Certification Notice vesting jurisdiction in this Court. (T.R. 2 at 2.) Mr. Odem filed a Request for Expedited Hearing, and this Court convened an evidentiary hearing to consider the claim.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

In deciding Mr. Odem’s request for additional medical benefits and temporary disability benefits, the Court must apply the following legal principles. Mr. Odem bears the burden of proof on all prima facie elements of his workers’ compensation claim. Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(6) (2015); see also Buchanan v. Carlex Glass Co., No. 2015-01-0012, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 39, at *5 (Tenn. Workers’ Comp. App. Bd. Sept. 29, 2015). He need not prove every element of his 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, Mr. Odem has the burden to come forward with sufficient evidence from which this Court can determine he is likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits. Id.

Mr. Odem seeks temporary disability and medical benefits for bilateral CTS. As explained below, the Court finds he is not entitled to either category of benefits at this time.

1. Mr. Odem provided Tyson notice of his injury in a timely manner.

Tyson raised lack of notice as a defense arguing that Mr. Odem failed to give notice within thirty days of the time he knew of a work-related injury. Because the notice issue is potentially determinative, the Court will address it first.

Mr. Odem seeks workers’ compensation benefits for bilateral CTS, which he allegedly developed gradually. Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Law provides the following concerning notice of gradual injuries:

3 (b) In those cases where the injury occurs as the result of gradual or cumulative events or trauma, then the injured employee or the injured employee’s representative shall provide notice of the injury to the employer within thirty (30) days after the employee:

(1) Knows or reasonably should know that the employee has suffered a work-related injury that has resulted in permanent physical impairment; or

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

Related

§ 50-6-201
Tennessee § 50-6-201(b)
§ 50-6-204
Tennessee § 50-6-204(a)(l)(A)
§ 50-6-239
Tennessee § 50-6-239(c)(6)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2016 TN WC 283, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/odem-abul-v-tyson-foods-tennworkcompcl-2016.