Whitley, Michael v. Essary Food Stores, LLC

2017 TN WC 60
CourtTennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
DecidedMarch 27, 2017
Docket2016-02-0532
StatusPublished

This text of 2017 TN WC 60 (Whitley, Michael v. Essary Food Stores, LLC) 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
Whitley, Michael v. Essary Food Stores, LLC, 2017 TN WC 60 (Tenn. Super. Ct. 2017).

Opinion

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

Michael Whitley, ) Docket No. 2016-02-0532 Employee, ) ) v. ) State File Number 83297-2016 ) Essary Food Stores, LLC ) d/b/a Sav-A-Lot, ) Judge Brian K. Addington Employer, ) ) And ) ) State Auto, ) Carrier. ) )

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER (DECISION ON THE RECORD)

This matter came before the undersigned Workers' Compensation Judge on March 17, 2017, upon the Request for Expedited Hearing filed by Michael Whitley. Mr. Whitley filed the REH on February 24, 2017, and requested the Court decide the matter on the record without an evidentiary hearing. Sav-A-Lot did not request an in-person hearing.

Consequently, the Court issued a Docketing Notice for File Review Determination, listing the documents contained in the record and allowing the parties until March 24, 2017, to object to the admissibility of any document and/or to file a Position Statement. Sav-A-Lot objected to certain medical records.

The central legal issues are 1) whether Mr. Whitley sustained a compensable injury as defined in Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-102(14)(A) (2016) in August 2016 or on a gradual basis; and, 2) whether Mr. Whitley satisfied the notice requirements of Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-201 (20 16). For the reasons set forth below, the Court finds Mr. Whitley is not likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits

1 on either issue. Consequently, he is not entitled to the requested workers' compensation benefits at this time.

History of Claim

Mr. Whitley worked for Sav-A-Lot as a meat cutter. According to his affidavit, he injured his right wrist and thumb on September 15, 2016, as a result of the exertion required to use dull knives. He stated he previously asked store managers to provide proper sharpening stones for the knives, but they ignored his requests.

Mr. Whitley immediately reported the injury to Brian Hill, the meat manager, and to the assistant store manager, Roy. Both told him he needed to report it to the store manager, Justin Essary. Mr. Essary was not present, so Mr. Whitley sought medical attention without speaking with Mr. Essary.

Mr. Whitley presented to Urgent Care for evaluation where he saw Dr. Peter Litchfield. Under the history section of his report, Dr. Litchfield noted Mr. Whitley's "complaints of gradual onset of mild right > left wrist pain (pain to base of right thumb- increased use recently-at work)." X-rays indicated a possible fracture at the base of thumb. Dr. Litchfield referred Mr. Whitley to an orthopedist.

The following day, Mr. Whitley saw Dr. David Evans at Watauga Orthopedics. Dr. Evans recorded Mr. Whitley's history as follows: "A couple of weeks ago he injured his thumb, but does not remember how. MCP joint pain of right thumb, no swelling, popping, or locking. [P]ain with ROM or use, x-rays brought with him today." Upon exam and review of the previous x-rays, Dr. Evans noted "tenderness of the CMC joint and the first metacarpal" without a fracture and diagnosed a sprain of the carpometacarpal joint, prescribed pain rub, fitted him with a thumb brace, and excused him from work until September 19, 2016.

On October 18, 2016, Mr. Whitley met with Mr. Essary about his alleged work injury. Prior to the meeting, he claimed to have called the Bureau of Workers' Compensation to determine if Sav-A-Lot had filed notice of his injury; there was no such record. He then confronted Mr. Essary about the injury in Mr. Essary's office. After he questioned Mr. Essary as to whether Sav-A-Lot had filed his claim, Mr. Essary terminated him and would not discuss the matter further.

Sav-A-Lot's version of events differed greatly from Mr. Whitley's version. Mr. Essary stated in his affidavit that Mr. Whitley was a short-term employee and never reported an injury to him or any supervisor or manager. Mr. Essary made no comment in his affidavit concerning the cause of Mr. Whitley's termination.

In his Petition for Benefit Determination (PBD), REH and accompanymg

2 affidavit, Mr. Whitley requested payment for medical treatment and temporary disability benefits. He asserted he provided proper notice of his injury to Sav-A-Lot, but the managers ignored him. According to Mr. Whitley, Mr. Essary terminated him when he tried to report his injury.

Sav-A-Lot responded to Mr. Whitley's REH and asserted it had no notice of Mr. Whitley's alleged a work injury until it received a copy of his PBD sometime after October 26, 2016. It further asserted Mr. Whitley did not give notice within fifteen days of the alleged injury, and that the medical records do not support a finding of Mr. Whitley suffering a work injury on September 15, 2016. It requested the Court deny Mr. Whitley's claim for benefits.

Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law

In this workers' compensation case, Mr. Whitley has the burden of proof on all essential elements of his claim. Scott v. Integrity Staffing Solutions, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 24, at *6 (Aug. 18, 20 15). However, Mr. Whitley 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, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 6, at *7 -8, 9 (Mar. 27, 20 15). Instead, he must come forward with sufficient evidence from which the trial court can determine that he is likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits. I d.

In order to be compensable, a work injury must meet the definition of "injury" set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-102(14) (2016). The statute requires that the injury must be "by accident.'' Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-102(14)(A) explains, "An injury is 'accidental' only if the injury is caused by a specific incident, or set of incidents, arising primarily out of and in the course and scope of employment, and is identifiable by time and place of occurrence[.]" (Emphasis added).

There is conflicting information as to when and how Mr. Whitley sustained his alleged injury. On the one hand, he seemed to assert a gradual injury, yet on the other, he appears to assert he sustained an acute injury on September 15, 2016. Further confusion is caused by the history he provided Dr. Litchfield, where he appeared to assert a gradual injury, and by his statement to Dr. Evans that he injured himself "a couple of weeks" prior to the alleged date of injury and did not know how he injured himself.

Based on the evidence provided, the Court finds that Mr. Whitley has given conflicting statements as to how and when he was injured. Consequently, he failed to show he is likely to succeed at a hearing on the merits because he failed to establish a specific incident or series of incidents identifiable by time and place of occurrence as required by Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-102(14)(A) (2016).

The Court also finds that Mr. Whitley's claim fails on the issue of notice. 3 According to Mr. Whitley, he reported the injury to the meat department manager and the assistant store manager on September 15. He also claimed to have reported the injury to Mr. Essary on October 18. Mr. Essary denied Mr. Whitley reported an injury to him or anyone else at Sav-A-Lot until after he was terminated.

Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-201(a)(1) (2016) states:

No compensation shall be payable under this chapter, unless the written notice is given to the employer within fifteen ( 15) days after the occurrence of the accident, unless reasonable excuse for failure to give the notice is made to the satisfaction of the tribunal to which the claim for compensation may be presented.

The evidence is equivocal on this issue.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2017 TN WC 60, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/whitley-michael-v-essary-food-stores-llc-tennworkcompcl-2017.