C.H. GUENTHER & SON, INC. v. SUE ANN HEAD ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. December 10, 2012)
An employee appeals the trial court’s decision to void a final administrative order by the Department of Labor awarding the employee attorney fees with respect to the employee’s actions to enforce a workers’ compensation settlement. We have determined that the applicable request for assistance process does not constitute a contested case under the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act and that the trial court therefore lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear this matter. We reverse the decision of the trial court.
Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/chguenther.pdf
Tennessee Personal Injury Law Blog - published by Bryan L. Capps and Stephen A. Burroughs. The Law Office of Stephen A. Burroughs – proudly serving clients throughout East Tennessee.
Showing posts with label Department of Labor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Department of Labor. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
Friday, June 22, 2012
TWCA reviews whether an employee exhausted his administrative remedies after his employer denied approval for a surgical procedure
SAMMY T. ROBERTSON v. ROADWAY EXPRESS, INC. (TWCA June 8, 2012)
Pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 51, this workers’ compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel for a hearing and a report of findings of fact and conclusions of law.
The employee injured his lower back on August 22, 2005. The trial court approved a settlement of his workers’ compensation claim in 2008. The order approving the workers’ compensation settlement provided for future authorized medical treatment in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6- 204.
In January 2011, the employee’s treating physician recommended a surgical procedure. The employer’s medical utilization review provider determined that the medical necessity of the procedure was not documented, and the employer denied approval for the procedure. The employee appealed the decision to the Department of Labor and Workforce Development (“the Department”), and the Department’s medical director did not overturn the utilization review decision.
The employee then filed a petition in the trial court, seeking an order requiring the employer to authorize the surgery. The trial court granted the petition but denied the employee’s application for attorney’s fees. The employer has appealed, contending that the trial court erred by granting the petition, that the employee failed to exhaust his administrative remedy, and that the petition is barred by res judicata and collateral estoppel. The employee has appealed from the denial of an award of attorney’s fees. We vacate the judgment of the trial court and dismiss the case without reaching the merits of the appeal.
Pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 51, this workers’ compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel for a hearing and a report of findings of fact and conclusions of law.
The employee injured his lower back on August 22, 2005. The trial court approved a settlement of his workers’ compensation claim in 2008. The order approving the workers’ compensation settlement provided for future authorized medical treatment in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6- 204.
In January 2011, the employee’s treating physician recommended a surgical procedure. The employer’s medical utilization review provider determined that the medical necessity of the procedure was not documented, and the employer denied approval for the procedure. The employee appealed the decision to the Department of Labor and Workforce Development (“the Department”), and the Department’s medical director did not overturn the utilization review decision.
The employee then filed a petition in the trial court, seeking an order requiring the employer to authorize the surgery. The trial court granted the petition but denied the employee’s application for attorney’s fees. The employer has appealed, contending that the trial court erred by granting the petition, that the employee failed to exhaust his administrative remedy, and that the petition is barred by res judicata and collateral estoppel. The employee has appealed from the denial of an award of attorney’s fees. We vacate the judgment of the trial court and dismiss the case without reaching the merits of the appeal.
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
Court reviews a workers' compensation claim brought against the TN Department of Labor and Workforce Development
ALSTOM POWER, INC., v. SUE ANN HEAD, ADMINISTRATOR, TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT, WORKERS' COMPENSATION DIVISION, et al. (Tenn. Ct. App. February 21, 2012)
Plaintiff employer confronted with a worker's compensation claim by its employee filed an action for declaratory judgment, injunction relief, and a petition for certiorari against the Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development and the employee. Plaintiff's principal contention was that the Department of Labor prepared an order for medical benefits directing the employer to provide the employee with additional panels of physicians from which he could choose for treatment, and concluded by averring that it was threatened with a $10,000 penalty if it did not comply.
The Trial Court initially issued a restraining order, but the Trial Court ultimately concluded that it did not have jurisdiction over the issues because suit had been filed before the administrative review process was exhausted. Plaintiff appealed and we affirm the Judgment of the Trial Court, and remand.
Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/alstompower_022112.pdf
Plaintiff employer confronted with a worker's compensation claim by its employee filed an action for declaratory judgment, injunction relief, and a petition for certiorari against the Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development and the employee. Plaintiff's principal contention was that the Department of Labor prepared an order for medical benefits directing the employer to provide the employee with additional panels of physicians from which he could choose for treatment, and concluded by averring that it was threatened with a $10,000 penalty if it did not comply.
The Trial Court initially issued a restraining order, but the Trial Court ultimately concluded that it did not have jurisdiction over the issues because suit had been filed before the administrative review process was exhausted. Plaintiff appealed and we affirm the Judgment of the Trial Court, and remand.
Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/alstompower_022112.pdf
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Court reviews a penalty issued by the Department of Labor and Workforce Development
LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY ET AL. v. TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT AND WORKERS' COMPENSATION DIVISION (Tenn. Ct. App. January 4, 2011)
This action was filed pursuant to the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act, Tennessee Code Annotated section 4-5-322, for contested cases. The petitioner challenges a penalty assessed by the Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development, Division of Workers' Compensation. The stated reason for the penalty was the failure to file Form C-20, Tennessee Employer's First Report of Work Injury, regarding eighteen injuries that occurred in January and February 2003 which were medical only injuries, meaning no disability benefits were owing. The trial court affirmed the penalty.
We find the petitioner was not afforded proper notice of the Department's basis for issuing the penalty in violation of the petitioner's due process rights under the UAPA, Tennessee Code Annotated section 4-5-307. We also find that the Department exceeded its authority by changing its "interpretation" of Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. 0800-2-1-.06, a rule that was unambiguous and, thus, not subject to interpretation. The trial court's holding is reversed, and this matter is remanded with instructions to vacate the penalty assessed against the petitioner.
Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2012/libertymutual_010411.pdf
This action was filed pursuant to the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act, Tennessee Code Annotated section 4-5-322, for contested cases. The petitioner challenges a penalty assessed by the Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development, Division of Workers' Compensation. The stated reason for the penalty was the failure to file Form C-20, Tennessee Employer's First Report of Work Injury, regarding eighteen injuries that occurred in January and February 2003 which were medical only injuries, meaning no disability benefits were owing. The trial court affirmed the penalty.
We find the petitioner was not afforded proper notice of the Department's basis for issuing the penalty in violation of the petitioner's due process rights under the UAPA, Tennessee Code Annotated section 4-5-307. We also find that the Department exceeded its authority by changing its "interpretation" of Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. 0800-2-1-.06, a rule that was unambiguous and, thus, not subject to interpretation. The trial court's holding is reversed, and this matter is remanded with instructions to vacate the penalty assessed against the petitioner.
Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2012/libertymutual_010411.pdf
Monday, November 29, 2010
Court Reviews a TN Labor Department Board of Review Denial of Unemployment Compensation Benefits
TOM AGNEW v. MERITAN, ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. November 29, 2010)
In this matter, the plaintiff appeals the decision of the Board of Review of the Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development that he is disqualified from receiving unemployment compensation benefits pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. section 50-7-301, as a result of his failure to establish that he had covered wages not provided by an unemployment workrelief program financed by a federal agency under Tenn. Code Ann. section 50-7-207(c)(5)(G). The trial court upheld the decision of the Board of Review. We affirm.
Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2010/agnewt_112910.pdf
In this matter, the plaintiff appeals the decision of the Board of Review of the Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development that he is disqualified from receiving unemployment compensation benefits pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. section 50-7-301, as a result of his failure to establish that he had covered wages not provided by an unemployment workrelief program financed by a federal agency under Tenn. Code Ann. section 50-7-207(c)(5)(G). The trial court upheld the decision of the Board of Review. We affirm.
Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2010/agnewt_112910.pdf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)