Valentine, Sandra v. Kellogg Companies

2016 TN WC 181
CourtTennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
DecidedAugust 9, 2016
Docket2016-08-0288
StatusPublished

This text of 2016 TN WC 181 (Valentine, Sandra v. Kellogg Companies) 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
Valentine, Sandra v. Kellogg Companies, 2016 TN WC 181 (Tenn. Super. Ct. 2016).

Opinion

FILED August 9, 2016

TN COURT OF WORKERS ' CO!\IPI ·sATIO CLAIMS

Time 7:15AM

TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION IN THE COURT OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS AT MEMPHIS

Sandra Valentine, ) Docket No.: 2016-08-0288 Employee, ) v. ) State File No.: 1969-2016 Kellogg Companies, ) Self-Insured Employer. ) Judge Jim Umsted

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER DENYING REQUESTED BENEFITS

This case came before the undersigned Workers' Compensation Judge upon the Request for Expedited Hearing filed by the employee, Sandra Valentine, under Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-239 (2015). The present focus of this case is whether the employer, Kellogg Companies, must provide a panel of psychiatrists and temporary disability benefits for Ms. Valentine's alleged work-related mental injury. The central legal issue is whether Ms. Valentine can demonstrate a likelihood of success at a trial on the merits of these issues. For the reasons set forth below, the Court holds Ms. Valentine is unlikely to succeed at a hearing on the merits in proving entitlement to a panel of psychiatrists and temporary disability benefits.

History of Claim

The following facts were established at the Expedited Hearing held on August 2, 2016. Ms. Valentine is a forty-six-year-old resident of Shelby County, Tennessee. She began working as a production operator for Kellogg in 2007. On September 12, 2014, Ms. Valentine sustained a work-related injury to her left hand after slipping on a wet floor. 1 She filed a complaint with the Tennessee Division of Occupational Safety and Health (TOSHA) due to the hazardous condition that allegedly caused her fall. Thereafter, on or about November 3, 2015, Ms. Valentine had an emotional breakdown at work that she related to pain from her compensable hand injury as well as to alleged

1 Ms. Valentine claimed the mental injury for which she currently seeks benefits relates back to her September 12, 2014 work injury. However, the Petition for Benefit Determination and Dispute Certification Notice before this Court list the date of injury as November 10, 2015.

1 harassment and disparate treatment by Kellogg management after she filed the TOSHA complaint.

Ms. Valentine testified about multiple incidents, including several unfounded warnings against her for violation of company rules, which demonstrated the hostile work environment she claimed to endure after filing her workers' compensation claim and TOSHA complaint in 2014. 2 She also testified about the hand pain and swelling she continued to experience since her September 12, 2014 work injury. According to Ms. Valentine, no one particular incident caused her mental breakdown. Instead, she indicated it was a combination of her physical injury and the cumulative episodes of harassment that led to her mental injury. Ms. Valentine stated she never received a panel of psychiatrists or an authorized physician from Kellogg to obtain help for her mental injury. She admitted, however, that neither Dr. Owen Tabor, Jr. nor Dr. Christian Fahey, her authorized physicians for her hand injury, referred her for psychological or psychiatric services. While she did seek help through Kellogg's Employee Assistance Program with licensed clinical social worker Shelia Blevins-Crisler, she advised she continued to experience depression and memory issues due to the mental injury and asked the Court to order continued care.

Kellogg presented no competing testimony to oppose Ms. Valentine's description of the harassment she endured at work. Instead, it simply argued she had not met her burden of proving a mental injury as defined by the Tennessee Workers' Compensation Law. In particular, it argued Ms. Valentine could not point to one identifiable incident that led to her mental injury. It further contended that Ms. Valentine never received a referral for psychiatric or psychological services from any of her treating physicians for her hand injury.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

General Legal Principles

Ms. Valentine need not prove every element of her claim by a preponderance of the evidence in order to recover temporary disability and/or medical benefits 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, 20 15). Instead, she must come forward with sufficient evidence from which this Court might determine she is likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits. Id.; Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(l) (2015).

This lesser evidentiary standard does not relieve Ms. Valentine of the burden of

2 Ms. Valentine called two witnesses, Pamela Ewing and Ira Jones, to testifY to the incidents of harassment they witnessed her endure at the hand of Kellogg management.

2 producing evidence of an injury by accident that arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of employment at an Expedited Hearing, but "allows some relief to be granted if that evidence does not rise to the level of a 'preponderance of the evidence."' Buchanan v. Car/ex Glass Co., No. 2015-01-0012, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 39, at *6 (Tenn. Workers' Comp. App. Bd. Sept. 29, 2015). In analyzing whether she met her burden, the Court will not remedially or liberally construe the law in her favor, but instead shall construe the law fairly, impartially, and in accordance with basic principles of statutory construction favoring neither Ms. Valentine nor Kellogg. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-116 (2015).

Claim for Mental Injury

In the present case, this Court must first address whether Ms. Valentine is likely to succeed at a hearing on the merits regarding her claim for mental injury. Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-102(17) (2015) defines two types of mental injuries. The first type must arise "primarily out of a compensable physical injury," and the second type must arise "primarily out of ... an identifiable work related event resulting in a sudden or unusual stimulus, and shall not include a psychological or psychiatric response due to the loss of employment or employment opportunities."

At the Expedited Hearing, Ms. Valentine identified two possible causes of her alleged mental injury. First, she claimed her mental injUI·y arose out of an earli r hand injury, which Kellogg previously accepted as a compensable injury. 3 However, Ms. Valentine presented no medical evidence showing that her alleged mental injury arose primarily out of her compensable hand injury as requiTed by Tennessee Code Annotated secti n 50-6-102(17) (2015). 4 Furthermore Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6- 204(h) (20 15) provides all psychological or psychiatric services shall be rendered only by psychologists or psychiatrists and shall be limited to those ordered upon the referral of authorized physicians. Ms. Valentine identified Dr. Owen Tabor and Dr. Christian Fahey as her authorized treating orthopedic physicians for her hand injury, and she testified that neither Dr. Tabor nor Dr. Fahey referred her for psychological or psychiatric services. Consequently, this Court finds Ms. Valentine has not shown her mental injury primarily arose out of her September 12, 2014 hand injury or that a referral for psychological or psychiatric services under Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-204(h) (2015) was ever made.

3 While the Court notes Ms. Valentine's hand injury claim is the subject of an earlier-filed PBD, which is not before this Court, it further notes Ms.

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

Related

Gatlin v. City of Knoxville
822 S.W.2d 587 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2016 TN WC 181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/valentine-sandra-v-kellogg-companies-tennworkcompcl-2016.