Sadeekah, Khaled v. Zaher Abdelaziz, d/b/a Home Furniture And More

2021 TN WC 162
CourtTennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
DecidedMarch 22, 2021
Docket2020-06-02
StatusPublished

This text of 2021 TN WC 162 (Sadeekah, Khaled v. Zaher Abdelaziz, d/b/a Home Furniture And More) 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
Sadeekah, Khaled v. Zaher Abdelaziz, d/b/a Home Furniture And More, 2021 TN WC 162 (Tenn. Super. Ct. 2021).

Opinion

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

AT NASHVILLE KHALED SADEEKAH, ) Docket No. 2020-06-0218 Employee, ) v. ) State File No. 10400-2020 ZAHER ABDELAZIZ, d/b/a HOME _ ) FURNITURE AND MORE, ) Judge Joshua Davis Baker

Employer. )

COMPENSATION ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT

The Court heard Home Furniture’s Motion for Summary Judgment on March 1, 2021. Home Furniture alleged three grounds for summary judgment, including its contention that Mr. Sadeekah cannot establish medical causation through an expert opinion. Based on Mr. Sadeekah’s failure to provide an expert medical opinion proving causation, the Court grants Home Furniture’s motion and dismisses this claim with prejudice.

Claim History

Mr. Sadeekah alleged he injured his right wrist, elbow, and shoulder while recovering from an unrelated surgery on his right arm, when he tried to stop a dresser from sliding down the ramp of a delivery truck in late March 2019.!

Home Furniture provided no benefits, and Mr. Sadeekah filed a petition for benefit determination. After an expedited hearing, the Court denied his request for temporary disability and medical benefits. This motion followed.

In its statement of undisputed material facts, Home Furniture asserted Mr. Sadeekah did not present expert medical proof that his alleged injury is causally related to his employment. The medical records support this assertion. The records show Mr. Sadeekah

' The petition for benefit determination alleged a March 22, 2019 injury date, but at an expedited hearing Mr. Sadeekah testified he thinks the accident occurred March 29.

1 visited the doctor several times around his alleged date of injury for a non-work-related arm injury. Specifically, on March 25, 2019, Mr. Sadeekah denied “any post-operative complications or complaints.” He visited the doctor again on April 1, and the notes do not reflect any injury from late March. Likewise, an MRI of his right shoulder taken roughly eight months after his alleged injury states, “Right shoulder pain for 3-4 months. No trauma[.]” In response, Mr. Sadeekah filed a Form C-32 Standard Form Medical Report on February 22, 2021, which Home Furniture moved to strike due to its late filing.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

Under Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure 56, summary judgment is appropriate if there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. To meet this standard, Home Furniture must either: (1) submit affirmative evidence that negates an essential element of Mr. Sadeekah’s claim, or (2) demonstrate that his evidence is insufficient to establish an essential element of his claim. Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-16-101; see also Rye v. Women’s Care Ctr. of Memphis, MPLLC, 477 S.W.3d 235, 264 (Tenn. 2015). If Home Furniture satisfies this burden, Mr. Sadeekah must then show that the record contains specific facts upon which a trier of fact could base a decision in his favor. Rye, at 265.

However, Mr. Sadeekah “may not rest upon the mere allegations or denials of [his] pleading.” Rye, at 265. Rather, he must respond by producing affidavits, pleadings, depositions, responses to interrogatories, or admissions that set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. Tenn. R. Civ. P. 56.06. If he fails to do so, “summary judgment, if appropriate, shall be entered against the [nonmoving] party.” Jd.

While Home Furniture raised several arguments supporting its motion, its argument concerning the lack of medical causation through expert opinion ensures judgment in its favor as a matter of law. The medical proof showed that Mr. Sadeekah underwent surgery for a non-work-related arm injury. He visited the doctor on April 1, 2019, for follow-up treatment but said nothing about an injury at work. Further, none of the medical records linked his alleged injury to his work for Home Furniture.

Mr. Sadeekah submitted a Form C-32 final medical report in response to Home Furniture’s motion for summary judgment. Any party can introduce “direct testimony from a physician through a written medical report on a form established by the administrator,” which is Form C-32. Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-235(c)(1). The subsection continues by establishing that a party can submit the form “at any stage of a workers’ compensation claim in lieu of a deposition” so long as the party gives the opposing party twenty-days’ notice. Id. at (c)(2).

Mr. Sadeekah filed the Form C-32 on February 22, 2021, which was seven days before the summary judgment hearing. Home Furniture objected to Mr. Sadeekah using it

2 to support his opposition to the motion and moved to strike it. While the Court appreciates Mr. Sadeekah’s lack of legal training may disadvantage him, it also has a duty to provide a fair process for all and must require Mr. Sadeekah to comply with the same standards as a represented party. See, e.g., Bates v. Command Ctr., Inc., 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 10, at *3 (Apr. 2, 2015). Therefore, the Court holds it must exclude the Form C-32 from consideration in determining this motion.”

Without the Form C-32, Mr. Sadeekah cannot meet his burden of proof at trial. See Wheetley v. State, No. M2013-01707-WC-R3-WC, 2014 Tenn. LEXIS 476, at *5 (Tenn. Workers’ Comp. Panel June 25, 2014) (“In all but the most simple and routine cases, an employee must prove the causal relationship between an injury and a workplace accident through expert medical proof.”). Because he failed to provide an expert medical opinion proving causation, summary judgment must be entered against him. Tenn. R. Civ. P. 56.06. The Court, therefore, finds Mr. Sadeekah failed to identify any genuine issue of material fact in dispute, and Home Furniture is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. The Court grants Home Furniture’s motion for summary judgment and dismisses Mr. Sadeekah’s claim with prejudice to its refiling.

2. Unless appealed, this order shall become final in thirty days after issuance. 3. The filing fee of $150.00 is taxed to Home Furniture under Tennessee Compilation Rules and Regulations 0800-02-21-.07, to be paid to the Court Clerk and for which

execution might issue as necessary. 4. Home Furniture shall prepare and file the SD-2 with the Court Clerk within ten days of this order becoming final.

ENTERED March 22, 2021.

Yn? Joshua Davis Baker, Judge Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

2 While this result may seem harsh, the Court notes that the Form C-32 was signed on December 31, 2020, two months before the hearing, giving Mr. Sadeekah ample time to provide timely notice to Home Furniture. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of this Order was sent as indicated on March 22, 2021.

Name Certified | Email | Service sent to: Mail Khaled Sadeekah, xX khalidsaddikah @ gmail.com Employee Courtney Smith, 4 csmith @ spicerfirm.com Employer’s Attorney / ) | } “ne { Mur—

Penny Shrumi/ Court Clerk Court of Woskers’ Compensation Claims We.courtclerk @tn.gov

Compensation Hearing Order Right to Appeal:

If you disagree with this Compensation Hearing Order, you may appeal to the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board or the Tennessee Supreme Court. To appeal to the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board, you must:

1.

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

Related

Michelle RYE Et Al. v. WOMEN’S CARE CENTER OF MEMPHIS, MPLLC Et Al.
477 S.W.3d 235 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2021 TN WC 162, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sadeekah-khaled-v-zaher-abdelaziz-dba-home-furniture-and-more-tennworkcompcl-2021.