Shiflet, Richard v. EMCOR Group, Inc, d/b/a Cherokee Millwright, Inc.

2019 TN WC 150
CourtTennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
DecidedOctober 21, 2019
Docket2019-02-0247
StatusPublished

This text of 2019 TN WC 150 (Shiflet, Richard v. EMCOR Group, Inc, d/b/a Cherokee Millwright, Inc.) 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
Shiflet, Richard v. EMCOR Group, Inc, d/b/a Cherokee Millwright, Inc., 2019 TN WC 150 (Tenn. Super. Ct. 2019).

Opinion

FILED Oct 21, 2019

01:16 PM(CT)

TENNESSEE COURT OF

CLAIMS

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

AT GRAY

RICHARD SHIFLET, ) Docket Number: 2019-02-0247 Employee, ) Vv. ) )

EMCOR GROUP, INC., d/b/a ) State File Number: 73240-2018 CHEROKEE MILLWRIGHT, INC. ) Employer, ) and )

AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY )_ Judge Brian K. Addington

OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA, ) Insurance Carrier. )

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER (DECISION ON THE RECORD)

This case came before the Court on October 21, 2019, and requires it to determine whether Richard Shiflet is entitled to temporary benefits and medical benefits, and whether he must undergo a neuropsychological examination at EMCOR’s request. ' Based on the record, the Court holds Mr. Shiflet is not entitled to temporary disability benefits but should return to Dr. William Fly to determine reasonable and necessary treatment options, and he is not required to undergo a neuropsychological examination at this time.

Claim History

A metal beam fell on Mr. Shiflet’s foot at work on September 18, 2018. He received emergency treatment and then came under orthopedist Dr. William Fly’s care, who determined Mr. Shiflet suffered a fracture and extensive soft-tissue damage. After the fracture healed, Dr. Fly recommended Lyrica to decrease his pain. When Mr.

' The Court scheduled an in-person expedited hearing, but the Judge’s unexpected illness caused its cancellation. Due to difficulty rescheduling, the Court informed the parties that it would make a decision on the record.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION Shiflet’s pain continued, Dr. Fly recommended injection therapy and a consultation with Dr. Bruce Fly for a possible nerve block.

Although Dr. Fly made the recommendation in December, EMCOR had not approved the consult when he saw Mr. Shiflet again in January 2019. Dr. Fly noted that Mr. Shiflet’s problems might worsen because of the denial, and he mentioned for the first time that he might be experiencing early complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). He re-requested the consult.

EMCOR eventually approved the consult. Dr. Bruce Fry administered the nerve block, which only provided two to three days of relief. Mr. Shiflet told Dr. William Fly during his February 2019 appointment that his pain was 10 out of 10. Dr. William Fly recommended another injection by Dr. Bruce Fly and a return appointment to see him.

During the March follow-up appointment, Dr. William Fry noted the second injection only provided two days of relief. He determined that Mr. Shiflet had CRPS type 1.” He placed him at maximum medical improvement (MMI), found he suffered fifteen-percent whole-body impairment from the work injury, and provided sedentary work restrictions. He instructed Mr. Shiflet to obtain a Lyrica prescription from his primary care provider, as he felt the prescription would be indefinite and he could not write it permanently.*

Mr. Shiflet’s primary care provider could not provide the Lyrica prescription, so EMCOR sent him to FNP Benjamin Meeks, who works in Dr. Turney Williams’s office. Dr. Williams’s office stopped the Lyrica because of its side effects. Instead, Dr. Williams recommended a pain stimulator for which Mr. Shiflet needed a psychological consult and stated he had developed depression from his injury. He also found Mr. Shiflet was not at MMI.

EMCOR denied the pain stimulator and the psychological consult, agreeing only to provide Lyrica. It offered a panel of pain management physicians, but Mr. Shiflet refused to choose a physician.’ Instead, he sought an independent examination at the Helen Ross McNabb Center, where Dr. Mamju Khanna found he was suffering from depression and anxiety related to work.

Similarly, EMCOR sought its own independent medical evaluation with Dr. Jeffrey Hazlewood, who stated Mr. Shiflet might have CRPS, but he needs a

* The American Medical Association’s Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment requires a one- year diagnosis before a physician can confirm and rate CRPS.

> EMCOR paid temporary total disability benefits until April 29, 2019.

*Dr. Williams was not a panel physician. neuropsychological examination to explore his complaints and CRPS diagnosis. EMCOR filed a motion to compel the neuropsychological examination with Dr. Sidney Alexander.

Mr. Shiflet filed a Request for Expedited Hearing seeking additional temporary total disability benefits, continued treatment with Dr. Williams, and a panel of physicians for depression. He argued that EMCOR refused to provide the requested benefits even though his providers now say he is not at MMI, and he needs a pain stimulator and treatment for depression. He argued that EMCOR’s request for the neuropsychological examination by Dr. Alexander was merely “doctor-shopping.”

EMCOR argued that Mr. Shiflet is at MMI and not entitled to additional temporary disability benefits. It asserted that Dr. William Fly only wanted him to see his primary care provider for the Lyrica. It moved to compel the neuropsychological examination based on Dr. Hazlewood’s report.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

Mr. Shiflet bears the burden of proof at all stages of his workers’ compensation claim. Buchanan v. Carlex Glass Co., 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 39, at *6 (Sept. 29, 2015). At an expedited hearing, a trial court may grant relief if the employee has met the burden of showing that he or she is likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits. Jd. Here, Mr. Shiflet must show he is entitled temporarily temporary disability benefits and that his request for medical treatment is reasonable and necessary.

Concerning the request for temporary disability benefits, Mr. Shiflet affirmed EMCOR paid him through April 29, 2019. Dr. Fly, the panel physician, placed him at MMI in March 2019. Temporary total disability benefits are terminated when an employee reaches MMI. Cleek v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 19 S.W.3d 770, 776 (Tenn. 2000). Dr. William Fly, the panel physician, placed Mr. Shiflet at MMI, and EMCOR paid Mr. Shiflet temporary benefits well after that determination. Mr. Shiflet has not presented sufficient evidence that he is likely to succeed at a hearing on the merits concerning temporary total disability benefits.

As for the requested medical benefits, Mr. Shiflet has not recently seen the panel physician, Dr. William Fly, who only recommended an indefinite Lyrica prescription. Later authorized providers, not selected from a panel, discontinued that medication and recommended additional treatment for pain and depression they relate to his injury. EMCOR denied the recommendations but offered a pain management panel, which Mr. Shiflet refused.

The Workers’ Compensation Law provides that a panel physician must make a referral for psychological or psychiatric services. Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-204(h) (2019).

3 Dr. William Fly never made this referral. Also, it has been months since he has seen Mr. Shiflet, and he has not considered the additional treatment recommendations that later authorized providers and Dr. Khanna made. Considering the extent of these recommendations versus Dr. William Fly’s proposed Lyrica prescription, the Court finds it reasonable for Mr. Shiflet to return to Dr. William Fly for further evaluation. Thus, the Court holds that Mr. Shiflet shall return to him.

Finally, concerning EMCOR’s motion to compel Mr. Shiflet to attend a neuropsychological examination, Dr. Hazlewood thinks Mr. Shiflet might have CRPS, but he would need this exam to rule out the condition.

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

Related

Cleek v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
19 S.W.3d 770 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2019 TN WC 150, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shiflet-richard-v-emcor-group-inc-dba-cherokee-millwright-inc-tennworkcompcl-2019.