TWCA reviews whether an employee was eligible for the reconsideration of her workers’ compensation settlement.

ROCHELLE M. EVANS v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY (TWCA February 10, 2012)



The employee sought reconsideration of her workers' compensation settlement. The trial court found that she had voluntarily resigned and was therefore not eligible to receive reconsideration. The employee has appealed. We affirm the trial court's judgment.



Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2012/evansr_021012.pdf

TWCA reviews whether an employer's motion for a medical examination is reasonable

PEFFERY IRONS v. K & K TRUCKING, INC. ET AL. (TWCA July 14, 2011)


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 sustained an injury which resulted in a court-approved workers' compensation settlement. His authorized physician later recommended medical treatment. The employer's utilization review provider denied approval of the proposed treatment. The employer filed a motion for a medical examination pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-204(d)(1) which is required if reasonable. The trial court found the employer's request to be unreasonable and denied the motion. The employer has appealed. We reverse the trial court's order and remand for entry of an order granting the motion. 


Opinion available at:

http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2011/ironsj_071411.pdf

Court reviews trial court's denial to enforce a settlement agreement in a wrongful death case.

CATHERINE M. LOVE, as next friend and natural mother of Savannah Love, a minor child and daughter of Rex Bryan Peterson, deceased, ET. AL. v. DORIS LAKINS WOODS (Tenn. Ct. App. November 4, 2010)

This case arises from the trial court's denial of Plaintiff/Appellants' motion to enforce a settlement agreement. Appellants, the surviving children of decedent, filed a wrongful death claim against the Appellee herein, the driver of a car involved in the accident that killed decedent. During negotiations, Appellee/Defendant's attorney proposed a settlement in the amount of Appellee's insurance policy limit, which Appellee's attorney misstated to be $100,000, when, in fact, the policy limit was $50,000.

The trial court denied Appellants' motion to enforce the $100,000 settlement finding that the settlement was not enforceable, as it failed to contain certain material terms of the agreement. We conclude that the trial court failed to determine whether an agency relationship existed between the Appellee's attorney and the insurance company and also whether the insurance company is required to be a party to this litigation. Vacated and remanded.

Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2010/lovec_110410.pdf

Court Reviews Whether Insurance Company’s Motion to Dismiss was Properly Granted in an Automobile Accident Case

SHEILA BROWN v. RICO ROLAND (Tenn. Ct. App. September 24, 2010)

The matters at issue pertain to the rights and responsibilities of the parties under the underinsured motorist provisions of Plaintiff's automobile insurance. Plaintiff, who was involved in a vehicular accident with another motorist, commenced this personal injury action to recover an amount "under $25,000." The only named defendant is the tortfeasor, however, State Farm is an unnamed party. This is due to the fact that Plaintiff served timely and proper notice on State Farm of the commencement of this action and that she was asserting an underinsured coverage claim pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. section 56-7-1206.

Plaintiff subsequently entered into a settlement agreement with the tortfeasor for the tortfeasor's policy limits of $25,000, at which time she properly served notice on State Farm of the proposed settlement and her willingness to enter into binding arbitration with State Farm to settle her claim for underinsured motorist benefits.

Thereafter, State Farm filed a motion to dismiss the underinsured claim against it claiming Plaintiff was made whole when she agreed to a settlement with the tortfeasor in an amount in excess of her ad damnum and therefore there was no claim to arbitrate. The court granted the motion to dismiss and Plaintiff appealed.

We have determined the trial court did not err in granting State Farm's motion to dismiss the claim against it because Plaintiff sought to recover a judgment in an amount under $25,000 from the tortfeasor and/or State Farm, and Plaintiff settled her claim against the tortfeasor for an amount in excess of the ad damnum. Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal of State Farm.

Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2010/browns_092410.pdf

Court Reviews a Motion to Set Aside a Judgment Approving a Settlement in a Workers’ Compensation Case

PATRICIA HENDERSON v. SAIA, INC. ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. August 24, 2010)

This workers' compensation appeal was initially referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel for a hearing and a report of findings of fact and conclusions of law in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-225(e)(3). After oral argument was conducted before the Panel, but before the Panel filed its opinion, the case was transferred to the full Court in order to consider a request under Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 60.02 to set aside a judgment approving a settlement. The trial court found no basis for setting aside the settlement under Rule 60.02. Neither do we. The judgment of the trial court upholding the parties' settlement is affirmed.

Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2010/hendersonp_082410.pdf