TWCA reviews whether employee satisfied his burden of proof as to causation

TIMOTHY BYROM v. RANDSTAD NORTH AMERICA, L.P. (TWCA March 8, 2012)

The employee fell at work. He was then diagnosed to have a brain hemorrhage. The evidence showed that the fall occurred in an open area, that it was unlikely that the employee either slipped or tripped, and that he struck his head on the floor but not upon any objects. Employee had no recollection of the fall. The employer denied the employee’s workers’ compensation claim, asserting that the fall did not arise from his employment. The trial court found that the employee did not sustain his burden of proof as to causation. Employee has appealed, arguing that the evidence preponderates against the trial court’s finding. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. Opinion available at: https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/byromt_030812.pdf

TWCA reviews when an employee's heart attack began and whether it was causally related to his employment

TIMOTHY D. CUNNINGHAM v. CITY OF SAVANNAH, TENNESSEE ET AL. (TWCA February 28, 2012)

The employee, an undercover drug investigator for the City of Savannah, alleged that he sustained a heart attack as a result of a physical confrontation with a suspect on March 2, 2005, during which he experienced tightness in his chest and shortness of breath. He experienced pressure in his chest and low energy but continued to work the following two days. On March 5, while engaged in activities unrelated to his job, he experienced nausea, profuse sweating, and severe pain in his chest, jaw, and left arm. His wife took him to a hospital emergency room where he was treated for an acute myocardial infarction.

At trial, one of his treating physicians testified that the heart attack began on March 2 and continued until March 5. A second treating physician and an evaluating physician testified that the March 2 incident did not cause the March 5 heart attack. The trial court found that the heart attack began on March 2, and the employer appealed.

On appeal, the employer 1 contends that the trial court erred in finding that the statutory presumption had not been overcome, erred in concluding that employee’s heart attack began on March 2, 2005, and erred by finding that employee’s heart attack was causally related to his employment. Although we agree that the trial court erred in its application of the statutory presumption, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/cunninghamt_022812.pdf

TWCA reviews whether employee's lung disease was aggravated by his exposure to smoke at work

GEORGE McGOWAN v. STATE OF TENNESSEE (TWCA February 16, 2012)



An employee was exposed to smoke as a result of a fire at his workplace. Testing revealed the presence of bullous emphysema, a dangerous condition caused by cigarette smoking. Surgery was required to treat that condition. The Claims Commission ruled that the smoke exposure at work had aggravated and advanced his preexisting lung disease and awarded permanent total disability benefits. The employer has appealed, contending that the evidence preponderates against the Commissioner's finding of causation. We agree and reverse the judgment.



Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2012/mcgowang_021612.pdf

TWCA reviews whether employee adequately proved that his injury was work-related

KENNETH STEWART v. WESTFIELD INSURANCE COMPANY (TWCA February16, 2012)



The appellant insurance company asserts on appeal that the employee failed to prove that his spinal infection was causally related to any work-place injury and that he also failed to provide the employer with timely notice of his injury. Based upon our review of the record, we conclude that the expert medical proof establishes causation and that the evidence supports the trial court's finding that the employee gave timely notice of his injury. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.


Opinion available at:

http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2012/stewartk_021612.pdf

Court reviews a medical negligence case involving injuries sustained during laser eye surgery

LEON DICKSON, SR. v. SIDNEY H. KRIGER, M.D. (Tenn. Ct. App. February 10, 2012)



This appeal arises from injuries Plaintiff sustained after undergoing laser corrective eye surgery. Plaintiff filed a complaint against Defendant alleging medical negligence. Subsequently, Defendant filed an amended answer alleging, inter alia, the affirmative defense of comparative fault.

Plaintiff filed a motion to strike portions of Defendant's amended answer, and following a hearing on the motion, Defendant agreed to the entry of a consent order waiving the defense of comparative fault.

Thereafter, Plaintiff filed motions in limine to preclude the testimony of two of Defendant's experts. Plaintiff argued that, because Defendant waived comparative fault, he could not use the causation testimony of the two experts to shift blame away from himself unless he first plead comparative fault under Rule 8.03 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure.

The trial court denied both motions. We granted permission for interlocutory appeal. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings.


Opinion available at:

http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2012/dicksonl_021012.pdf

TWCA determines the causation of two upper body injuries in a worker's compensation case

SANDRA JANE GARDNER v. RANDSTAD NORTH AMERICA, L.P. (TWCA November 1, 2010)

Employee alleged that she injured her left arm in the course of her employment. Employer denied liability, contending employee's injuries were not causally related to or arising from her employment.

The trial court found that employee injured her left wrist, left elbow, and left shoulder in the course and scope of her employment, and it awarded 39% permanent partial disability to the body as a whole. The trial court ordered employer to pay the treating physician the entire cost of surgery and treatment, and it ordered physician to reimburse TennCare. Employer has appealed.

We affirm as to the arm injury but conclude that the evidence preponderates against the trial court's finding that employee's shoulder injury was related to her employment. We also conclude that the trial court erred regarding the payment of medical expenses to the physician. Accordingly, we remand the case to the trial court for a determination of permanent partial disability to the arm and entry of an order regarding reimbursement of medical expenses.

Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2010/gardners_110110.pdf

Court reviews causation in an automobile accident case

GLENDA HAMPTON v. NORTHWEST TENNESSEE HUMAN RESOURCE AGENCY (Tenn. Ct. App July 13, 2010)

This is a personal injury case. The Appellant/Defendant's employee backed a van into a vehicle which the Appellee/Plaintiff was driving. Until the accident, the Plaintiff had not had any problems with her right shoulder. The morning after the accident the Plaintiff had pain and soreness in her shoulder. She was treated by three different orthopedic surgeons and ultimately had arthroscopic right shoulder surgery. The parties stipulated to liability. However, the Defendant disputed causation. A bench trial was held and the trial court found that the accident caused the Plaintiff's shoulder injury which necessitated the shoulder surgery. Defendant appealed from the trial court's judgment. We affirm.

Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2010/hamptong_CORR_071510.pdf

Court reviews causation in a medical malpractice and battery case

RUFUS R. CLIFFORD, III AND WIFE, CARRIE C. CLIFFORD v. LOYDA TACOGUE, M. D., ST. THOMAS HOSPITAL, AND ST. JUDE MEDICAL, S.C., INC. (Tenn. Ct. App. July 9, 2010)

Plaintiff husband alleged that he suffered an injury in the course of undergoing a cardiac catheterization procedure. Plaintiffs filed suit against the treating physician, alleging medical malpractice, lack of informed consent, and medical battery; against the hospital, alleging medical malpractice based on an actual or apparent agency with the physician; and against the manufacturer of the medical device used in the procedure, alleging that the manufacturer was vicariously liable for medical battery committed by its employee.

The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants on all claims, holding that plaintiffs failed to establish that the use of the medical device to close the site where the catheter was inserted was the cause of husband's injury. Finding that the defendants negated the element of causation essential to each cause of action, the trial court's judgment is affirmed.

Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2010/cliffordr_070910

Worker's Compensation Panel reviews whether employer is liable for employee's second injury

MONTRAIZE THOMISON v. YATES SERVICES, LLC (TWCA July 8, 2010)

Employee alleged that he sustained two compensable injuries to his left knee. The first injury occurred on December 12, 2004, was accepted as compensable by employer, and resulted in an award of 15% permanent partial disability to the left leg. That award is not contested on appeal. Employee alleged that a second injury occurred on September 26, 2006. Employer denied liability for that injury. The trial court found that Employee sustained a second injury and awarded 30% permanent partial disability to the left leg. On appeal, Employer asserts that the trial court erred by finding that a compensable injury occurred, or in the alternative, that Employee sustained a permanent disability as a result of the injury. We conclude that the record contains no medical evidence of a causal nexus between the second injury and the alleged disability. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand the case.

Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2010/thomisonm_070810

Court reviews causation and whether the trial court properly denied motions for summary judgment in a medical malpractice case

CAROL E. MILLER v. JOEL S. BIRDWELL, M.D., ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. June 23, 2010)

This appeal involves claims for medical malpractice against three doctors. The doctors each filed a motion for summary judgment. The trial court denied all three motions. After reviewing the record, we find that there are no material issues of fact in dispute. The defendant-doctors affirmatively negated an essential element of the Plaintiff's claim - causation. Plaintiff failed to come forward with expert proof to demonstrate that there was a material issue of fact in dispute. Accordingly, the doctors are entitled to summary judgment. Consequently, this Court finds that the trial court erred in denying the motions for summary judgment. Reversed and remanded.

Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2010/millerc_062310.pdf

TWCA reviews award of benefits for hearing loss in worker's compensation case

ARETIES McKAMEY v. LOCKHEED MARTIN ENERGY SYSTEMS, INC., ET AL. (TWCA March 12, 2010)

This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-225(e)(3) for a hearing and a report of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial court found that the employee had sustained a hearing loss as a result of exposure to noise during her work from 1944 to 1989 as a telephone operator for her employer, and awarded 50% permanent partial disability ("PPD") of the hearing of both ears. The employer has appealed, contending that the evidence preponderates against the trial court's finding on the issue of causation. Alternatively, it argues that the award is excessive. We reverse the judgment and dismiss the complaint.

Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2010/mckameya_031210.pdf

TWCA reviews findings of causation and compliance with the notice statute in worker's compensation case

KATHY MELISSA CANTRELL v. NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC., ET AL. (TWCA March 5, 2010)

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 trial court awarded workers' compensation benefits for gradual injuries to the employee's hands, arms, shoulders and left knee. On appeal, her employer asserts that the trial court erred by finding that she had complied with the notice statute, Tenn. Code Ann. section 50-6-201(b), and also by finding that she had sustained her burden of proof on the issue of causation.

We conclude that sufficient notice was given. In addition, we conclude that the evidence preponderates against the trial court's finding of a causal relationship between the employee's work and her left knee injury. We affirm the findings of causation concerning her other injuries.

Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2010/cantrellk_030510.pdf

Court reviews physician's testimony and trial court's summary judgment finding in wrongful death case.

WANDA F. DYKES, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS THE EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF RONALD DYKES v. THE CITY OF ONEIDA ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. February 26, 2010)

In this action, Wanda F. Dykes ("the plaintiff") filed suit against the City of Oneida ("the defendant") for the alleged wrongful death of her husband, Ronald Dykes. Her claim is based upon her allegation that police officers employed by the defendant were negligent in not calling for medical help when they responded to a call and found Ronald Dykes asleep and unresponsive in his home. They left him as they found him without calling for medical assistance. Mr. Dykes was found the next morning dead of a heart attack in the same recliner where the officers found him.

The thrust of the complaint is that, had the officers summoned medical help, Mr. Dykes' heart attack and resulting death could have been prevented. The defendant moved for summary judgment asserting, among other things, that the plaintiff cannot prove her theory of causation. While the motion was pending, the trial court, on four separate occasions, continued the hearing with respect to it, in order to give the plaintiff an opportunity to find and produce an expert to make out her case. When the motion was finally heard, the record contained the affidavit of a medical doctor stating that the failure of the officers to seek medical treatment for Mr. Dykes "may have allowed his condition to worsen and cause his death." The record also contained the same doctor's deposition testimony wherein he testified that he could not say Mr. Dykes would have survived if he had received prompt medical attention. The trial court granted the defendant summary judgment. The plaintiff appeals. We vacate the trial court's grant of summary judgment and remand for further proceedings.

Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2010/dykesw_022610.pdf

Court reviews whether evidence is sufficient to prove causation

SAMUEL S. HAINES v. HENRY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION (Tenn. Ct. App. February 11, 2010)

This appeal arises out of an auto accident. The trial court entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant appeals, arguing that the plaintiff's evidence was insufficient to prove causation. We reverse the judgment of the trial court and enter judgment in favor of the defendant.

Full opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2010/hainess_021110.pdf