TWCA reviews a decision to base an award on an MIR physician's rating

MARY D. COLE v. MARVIN WINDOWS OF TENNESSEE (TWCA March 22, 2012)

An employee sustained a compensable injury to her hand and elbow. Employee’s authorized treating physician assigned an impairment rating of 1% to both her right and left arms. The employee’s evaluating physician assigned 16% impairment to her right arm and 15% to her left arm. Due to the disparity between the physician’s ratings, the parties selected a physician from the Medical Impairment Registry (“MIR”) who assigned 5% impairment to each of the employee’s arms. The trial court based its award of disability benefits on the MIR physician’s rating. The employee has appealed, contending that she successfully rebutted the statutory presumption of correctness given to the MIR physician’s rating. We affirm the trial court’s ruling.


Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/colem_032212.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 a nurse was totally and permanently disabled by neck and lower back injuries

VONETTA MOUSSEAU v. DAVITA, INC. (TWCA February 22, 2012)

The employee, a registered nurse, injured her neck and lower back when she slipped and fell in a pool of water. She had surgical fusions of the cervical and lumbar spine. She continued to have serious symptoms for which she received numerous medications. Her treating physician testified that she was incapable of performing any nursing functions, including those that required only sedentary work. The trial court found her to be permanently and totally disabled. Her employer has appealed, contending that the evidence preponderates against the trial court’s finding on disability and that the employee should be held to have been offered a meaningful return to work. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Opinion available at:
https://www.tba.org/sites/default/files/mousseauv_022212.pdf

TWCA reviews whether the trial court adopted the proper impairment rating and found that

LARRY KENNETH HALE v. INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA ET AL. (TWCA February 17, 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 fell and struck both knees on a concrete landing in the course of his employment with the employer. His left knee required surgery and his right knee received limited medical treatment. The treating physician assigned 8% permanent impairment to the left leg. Employee's evaluating physician assigned 13% impairment to the left leg and 20% impairment to the right leg. The trial court adopted the evaluating physician's opinions and awarded 50% permanent partial disability to both legs.

Employer argues on appeal that the trial court erred by finding that Employee sustained a permanent injury to his right knee, by adopting the impairment rating of Dr. Landsberg over that of Dr. Gavigan for the left knee injury, by failing to find that Employee had a meaningful return to work, and by granting an excessive award of benefits. We affirm the judgment.


Opinion available at:

http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2012/halel_021712.pdf

Court reviews whether employee's motion for medical treatment was reasonable under the circumstances

BARBARA ANN HARVILLE v. EMERSON ELECTRIC COMPANY (TWCA July 6, 2011)


The employee sustained a compensable injury to her arm in 2001. In 2003, she entered into a settlement with her employer that preserved her right to receive reasonable and necessary medical treatment for the injury. In April 2008, the employee's authorized treating physician recommended a diagnostic test. The employer submitted the recommendation to its utilization review provider, which declined to approve the recommended test. The employee and her physician were notified of the denial in May 2008.

In June 2009, the employee filed a petition for contempt seeking to have the trial court order the recommended test. The trial court treated the petition as a motion for medical treatment pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-204(b)(2) (2008). The trial court found the recommended test to be reasonably necessary for the treatment of the injury, ordered the employer to authorize it, and awarded the employee attorney's fees. The employer appealed. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. 


Opinion available at:

http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2011/harvilleb_070611.pdf

TWCA reviews the percentage of permanent partial disability allocated by the trial court

DANIEL CLAY LEWIS v. DANA HOLDING CORPORATION (TWCA June 8, 2011)


An employee sustained an injury to his shoulder at work. After a surgical repair, he briefly returned to work but was laid off prior to reaching maximum medical improvement. He filed a complaint in chancery court seeking workers' compensation benefits from his employer. His treating physician assigned no impairment rating and placed no restrictions on his activities. An evaluating physician assigned 6% impairment to the body as a whole and recommended that Mr. Lewis avoid certain activities.

The trial court awarded 36% permanent partial disability to the body as a whole. The employer has appealed, contending that the award is excessive. We modify the judgment to award 24% permanent partial disability to the employee. We also conclude that local Rule 17A of the Chancery Court of the 28th Judicial District of Tennessee conflicts with Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 58. 


Opinion available at:

http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2011/lewisd_060811.pdf

TWCA Reviews whether Employee Met the Burden of Proof to Prove Permanent Impairment

LINDA LEE KENNEY v. SHIROKI NORTH AMERICA, INC. ET AL. (TWCA February 28, 2011)

The employee alleged that she sustained carpal tunnel syndrome and a right shoulder injury as a result of repetitive work activities. She was examined by several doctors provided by her employer, each of whom found that she had no permanent work injury. She sought and received treatment on her own with a physician who treated her for shoulder impingement and carpal tunnel syndrome. This doctor assigned permanent impairment but also testified that those conditions were not work-related. An evaluating physician assigned permanent impairment and testified that the conditions were work-related. Employee was a part-owner of an upholstery business during a period of time prior to the onset of her symptoms. Her testimony concerning the nature of her work for that business was inconsistent. The trial court found that she had not sustained her burden of proof and entered judgment for her employer. She has appealed, contending that the evidence preponderates against the trial court's findings. We affirm the judgment.

Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2011/kenneyl_022811.pdf

TWCA Reviews a Determination of Permanent Partial Disability in a Case Involving Conflicting Assessments between Several Physicians

PRIANGLAM BROOKS v. CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES (TWCA February 25, 2011)

Employee sustained a compensable injury to her lower back. Employer initially provided medical treatment, but Employer's insurer subsequently declined to provide additional medical treatment. Employee sought treatment on her own. Her treating physician found that she retained a 15% permanent impairment as a result of her injury. An examining physician for Employer opined that she had no impairment. A physician was selected through the Medical Impairment Registry ("MIR") process. That physician also stated that Employee had no permanent impairment.

The trial court found that Employee rebutted the presumption of correctness of the MIR physician's rating by clear and convincing evidence pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-204(d)(5) and awarded 20% permanent partial disability. Both sides appealed. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2011/brooksp_022511.pdf

TWCA Reviews Trial Court’s Choice of IME Rating over the Treating Physician’s Impairment Rating

DOROTHY MICHAUD v. REHAB CARE GROUP (TWCA January 27, 2011)

The employee sustained a compensable injury to her shoulder. As a result of her medical restrictions, she was unable to return to work at her previous job. The trial court adopted the impairment rating assigned by the physician conducting the employee's Independent Medical Examination over that of the treating doctor and awarded 48% permanent partial disability to the body as a whole. The employer appealed. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Opinion available at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2011/michaudd_012711.pdf

Court reviews summary judgment ruling in favor of a physician on the grounds of a patient's credibility.

TERESA L. WEAVER, ET AL. v. TRAVIS K. PARDUE, M.D., ET AL. (Tenn. Ct. App. November 1, 2010)

This appeal arises out of a primary care physician's alleged negligent and tortious treatment of a longtime patient. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the physician, questioning the credibility of the patient's allegations and holding in part that the physician's alleged conduct could not support a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress. We reverse and remand.

Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TCA/2010/weavert_110110.pdf

TWCA reviews whether trial court erred in accepting evidence of treating physician instead of evaluating physician

JUDITH ANN LESKO v. TENNESSEE SCHOOL BOARD, ET AL. (Tenn. SWCAP January 22, 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 employee alleged that she had sustained a permanent disability as a result of a work-related injury to her lower back. The trial court ruled that she had no permanent disability. She has appealed, contending that the trial court erred in accepting the testimony of the treating physician over that of the evaluating physician. We find no error, and affirm the judgment.

Opinion may be found at:
http://www.tba2.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/2010/leskoj_012210.pdf