Trull, Jerry v. Setco Automotive

2022 TN WC 26
CourtTennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
DecidedMarch 17, 2022
Docket2019-07-0593
StatusPublished

This text of 2022 TN WC 26 (Trull, Jerry v. Setco Automotive) 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
Trull, Jerry v. Setco Automotive, 2022 TN WC 26 (Tenn. Super. Ct. 2022).

Opinion

FILED Mar 17, 2022 09:37 AM(ET) TENNESSEE COURT OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS

TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS AT JACKSON

ESTATE OF JERRY TRULL, ) Docket No.: 2019-07-0593 Employee, ) v. ) SETCO AUTOMOTIVE, ) State File No.: 6640-2019 Employer, ) and ) TRAVELERS PROPERTY & ) Judge Thomas Wyatt CASUALTY CO. OF AMERICA, ) Carrier. )

COMPENSATION ORDER

The Court held a Compensation Hearing on March 9, 2022, in which the Estate of Jerry Trull sought permanent disability benefits that accrued before his non-work-related death. Setco Automotive argued that it owes no benefits because Mr. Trull’s back injury is not work-related and, if it were, the injury failed to result in impairment. For the reasons below, the Court awards the Estate permanent disability benefits that accrued before Mr. Trull’s death.

History of Claim

During his more than forty years working at Setco and its predecessors, Jerry Trull reported four work-related back injuries. He settled a 2001 back claim based on forty-five percent disability to the body. Afterward, he had bad days with his back and periodically missed work due to back pain. His transfer to a forklift-driver position in 2012 accommodated his back pain because it required less lifting and bending than his other jobs at Setco.

Mr. Trull also reported back injuries in 2016, 2017, and January 2019. He selected Dr. Vince Tusa for treatment after each injury. In 2017, Dr. Tusa ordered an MRI that showed degenerative changes throughout the lumbar spine.

1 Mr. Trull was sixty-four years old when he injured his back again in 2019. Dr. Tusa reported that he injured his back moving heavy buckets of paint. He also noted reports of back pain without radicular symptoms, which matched the reports from the previous injuries. Dr. Tusa testified that the 2017 MRI and one taken after the 2019 injury showed “osteoarthritis or an aging of the spine that he had back from 2001.” 1 He diagnosed the 2019 injury as a “strain of muscle, fascia and tendon of [the] lower back.”

Dr. Tusa testified that Mr. Trull’s back was at the limit of what it could do even before the 2019 injury occurred. However, he consistently returned Mr. Trull to work without restrictions. After his final visit with Mr. Trull for the 2019 injury, he noted: “there is nothing that he can do safely out there, and he is putting himself and others in jeopardy” by working. He noted that Mr. Trull became tearful when he heard this but later testified that Mr. Trull was unmotivated to go back to work. He also referred Mr. Trull to orthopedist Dr. Kyle Stephens, and Setco accepted the referral. 2

Mr. Trull saw Dr. Stephens in February 2019 and complained of back pain that was more severe than his pain before the injury. Dr. Stephens diagnosed a lumbar strain, ordered physical therapy, and imposed work restrictions. He kept the restrictions in place and ordered more physical therapy after a second visit. On April 16, Dr. Stephens released Mr. Trull to return to work without restrictions. He completed a Final Medical Report on April 18 assigning zero percent impairment and stating that he did not anticipate future treatment.

Mr. Trull returned to Dr. Stephens on April 25, reporting that Setco assigned him to custodial work that made his back hurt. Dr. Stephens diagnosed a recurrent lumbar strain, reinstated restrictions, and ordered more physical therapy. He ordered an MRI and additional physical therapy in May. He released Mr. Trull to work without restrictions on July 1 after reporting that the MRI showed degenerative changes.

At an August visit, Mr. Trull reported a return of his back pain. Dr. Stephens again diagnosed lumbar strain, ordered more physical therapy, and took him off work for six weeks. He again kept Mr. Trull out of work after a September visit and ordered six more weeks of physical therapy.

Dr. Stephens last saw Mr. Trull on November 5. He noted continuing back pain and kept Mr. Trull off work pending a functional capacity evaluation. 3 He also made a referral to neurosurgeon Dr. John Brophy.

Regarding diagnosis, Dr. Stephens testified that “Mr. Trull’s symptoms seemed to

1 All physicians and Mr. Trull testified by deposition. 2 Mr. Trull did not select Dr. Stephens from a panel, thus the presumption of correction does not apply to his opinions. 3 This examination was not performed. 2 be primarily back pain related or axial spine related[.]” He also testified that the 2019 injury just increased the pain from Mr. Trull’s pre-existing spinal conditions. Dr. Stephens testified that he assigned the rating of zero percent under the Sixth Edition of the AMA Guides, without stating the section he used to calculate the rating.

Mr. Trull saw Dr. Brophy once, in December 2019. He noted that Mr. Trull reported back pain into the right superior buttocks. Dr. Brophy testified “yes” to a question whether, on exam, Mr. Trull showed “axial back pain and not any sort of radicular component.” Dr. Brophy interpreted the 2017 and 2019 MRIs to reveal degenerative changes without evidence of a herniated disc or nerve root compression. He did not recommend surgery or restrict Mr. Trull’s activities.

Mr. Trull continued to work at Setco while treating his back. When he could not work, he received temporary disability benefits of $447.60 per week. During this time, Setco assigned him to jobs, such as mopping and cleaning walls, that kept him on his feet. Mr. Trull asked to return to his forklift job because the light-duty positions caused more pain. Setco did not honor this request even though Mr. Trull qualified by seniority for the forklift job under the terms of the applicable collective bargaining agreement.

Setco terminated Mr. Trull in January 2020 for mental and physical incapacity, providing a separation notice listing termination for “lack of work,” so he could draw unemployment. Mr. Trull never went back to work.

Mr. Trull filed this action seeking permanent total disability benefits. He argued that the forklift job at Setco was the only job he could perform at his age and with his sixth- grade education and numerous physical limitations. After Mr. Trull died from a non-work- related cause in March 2021, the Court substituted his Estate as the party-in-interest. The Estate argued that the date of maximum medical improvement is November 5, 2019, the last date Dr. Stephens saw him. Thus, the Estate claimed entitlement to permanent disability benefits accruing between November 5, 2019, and the date of Mr. Trull’s death.

Setco relied on the testimony of Drs. Tusa, Stephens, and Brophy to prove that Mr. Trull did not sustain a compensable permanent injury.

In contrast, the Estate submitted the testimony of Dr. Samuel Chung, a physical medicine and rehabilitation physician. Mr. Trull saw Dr. Chung in November 2019. He took a history, performed a physical examination, considered records documenting Drs. Tusa’s and Stephens’s treatment, and reviewed MRI results.

Dr. Chung’s exam revealed back pain; one-plus loss of the right Achilles reflex; decreased range of motion on side-bending, rotation, and extension; an antalgic gait as weight-bearing increased; and pain on palpation. He diagnosed a lumbar sprain/strain with discogenic pain. Dr. Chung explained that discogenic pain occurs when an inciting event

3 causes the nucleus pulposus of an already degenerated disc to escape into the interior of the disc. He clarified on cross-examination that the MRIs of Mr. Trull’s spine were not sufficiently sensitive to show the anatomical cause of his discogenic pain.

Dr.

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

Related

Henson v. City of Lawrenceburg
851 S.W.2d 809 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1993)
Crane Co. v. Jamieson
237 S.W.2d 546 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1951)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2022 TN WC 26, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trull-jerry-v-setco-automotive-tennworkcompcl-2022.