Emory, Wendy v. Epic Group, LP , 2017 TN WC 225 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •              TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
    IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS
    AT MURFREESBORO
    WENDY EMORY,                                          )   Docket No: 2017-05-0082
    Employee,                                    )
    v.                                                    )
    EPIC GROUP, LP,                                       )   State File Number: 71788-2016
    Employer,                                    )
    And                                                   )
    AMERISURE INS.,                                       )   Judge Dale Tipps
    Insurance Carrier.                           )
    )
    EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER GRANTING BENEFITS
    This matter came before the Court on November 28, 2017, for an Expedited
    Hearing. The present focus of this case is whether Ms. Emory is entitled to medical and
    temporary disability benefits for her low back injury.1 For the reasons set forth below,
    the Court holds Ms. Emory is entitled to medical treatment and temporary disability
    benefits.
    History of Claim
    Ms. Emory worked as a certified nursing assistant at an Epic Group nursing home
    when she injured her back assisting a patient on August 29, 2016. She reported the injury
    to her supervisors, who sent her to Fast Pace medical clinic the next day.
    Ms. Emory saw Christina Adams, a nurse practitioner, at Fast Pace and reported
    severe pain in her lower back and buttocks. NP Adams diagnosed low back pain/strain
    and returned Ms. Emory to work with restrictions, including limited lifting and bending.
    Although providers at Fast Pace modified Ms. Emory’s restrictions on occasion, they
    kept her on some form of light duty through her last visit on October 10. On that date,
    1
    Epic did not challenge the compensability of Ms. Emory’s injury at the Expedited Hearing, and compensability
    was not a disputed issue in the DCN.
    1
    NP April Caperton referred Ms. Emory to an orthopedic specialist.
    Ms. Emory continued to work while she was under light duty restrictions, but she
    testified Epic regularly required her to perform work that exceeded the restrictions. The
    affidavit of Debbie Mashburn, Ms. Emory’s supervisor, corroborates this testimony.
    Epic provided an orthopedic panel, but it only included the names of Dr. William
    Fontenot and NP Erica Hensley, who practice together at Seven Springs Orthopaedics &
    Sports Medicine. Ms. Emory agreed to go to Seven Springs, where she saw Ms. Hensley
    on October 18.        Ms. Hensley assessed lumbago, lumbar spasm, and lumbar
    radiculopathy. She refilled Ms. Emory’s Lortab prescription, ordered an MRI, and noted
    that “she will remain on light duty with lifting restrictions.”
    Ms. Emory returned the next week and NP Hensley noted the MRI results in part
    as, “L5-S1 some chronic disc desiccation, fairly well preserved interspace height, mild to
    moderate central disc bulging but the neural foramina are only slightly compromised.”
    She added lumbar degenerative disc disease to the assessment and continued the light
    duty restrictions until Ms. Emory’s return appointment in four weeks.
    Ms. Emory returned in less than two weeks, reporting uncontrolled pain. NP
    Hensley added “discogenic pain” to the assessment, recommended therapy, and ordered a
    back brace. She continued to see Ms. Emory every week or two until December 21,
    when Ms. Emory reported worsened pain caused by lifting and tugging patients. NP
    Henlsey noted, “She has agreed to let me take her off work for the next week.”
    Upon Ms. Emory’s return approximately two weeks later, she reported that two
    epidural injections had not improved her condition. Because of this and insufficient pain
    relief from NP Hensley’s prescriptions, Ms. Emory asked NP Hensley about a second
    opinion. NP Hensley told Ms. Emory she was welcome to get another opinion but also
    ordered an EMG and continued therapy. Ms. Emory “requested to be off work for the
    next five days” because she could not work without the pain medicines, and NP Hensley
    provided a note to that effect.
    Ms. Emory last received treatment at Seven Springs on January 12, when she
    requested time off from work “as they have not kept her on light duty as prescribed.” NP
    Hensley took her off work for two weeks pending completion of the EMG. An additional
    Return to Work note dated January 24, 2017, indicates Ms. Emory was medically unable
    to work until February 10.
    Epic paid Ms. Emory no temporary total disability (TTD) benefits after the
    providers at Seven Springs took her off work. She filed a Petition for Benefit
    Determination (PBD) on January 26 seeking temporary disability benefits and a valid
    panel of orthopedists.
    2
    During this time, Ms. Emory continued her regular, recurring appointments with
    her primary care provider, Express Med, for treatment of a number of unrelated medical
    problems. During one of these appointments on February 8, she reported pain in her low
    back, right hip, and leg. She told NP Meredith Hutton that none of her treatment to date
    had helped and that “she has been dismissed from [Seven Springs].” When she returned
    to Express Med a few days later, NP Melanie Stone noted back pain, back spasm, and
    lumbar radiculopathy. Because of a bulging disc at L5-S1, she referred Ms. Emory to a
    neurosurgeon. Ms. Emory testified that Express Meds has continued to provide
    prescriptions to manage her pain.2
    Epic subsequently provided a panel of orthopedic surgeons, and Ms. Emory
    selected Dr. Jeffrey Adams on March 13, although her appointment was not set until
    April 20. When she arrived for that appointment, Dr. Adams’ office informed her he did
    not treat back injuries. Ms. Emory then agreed to see Dr. Douglas Wilburn, but she did
    not see him until June 15.
    Dr. Wilburn examined Ms. Emory and assessed a work injury followed by chronic
    back and right leg pain. He stated, “I have no x-rays or reports to adequately review her
    injury.” He felt further evaluation was necessary, and he wanted to review her MRI and
    EMG results. Dr. Wilburn noted that Ms. Emory had been off work since January but
    said, “I am not going to address her work status until I have a chance to review her
    imaging studies.” He recommended additional physical therapy and offered to see her
    again and review her imaging studies.
    Dr. Wilburn sent a letter to Epic’s attorney in August confirming that he had
    received and reviewed Ms. Emory’s prior studies. He diagnosed:
    1) Work injury on 8/29/2016. 2) Chronic back and right leg pain without
    any clear cut neurological deficit or identifiable radiculopathy on either an
    MRI or EMG/NCS. 3) Discogenic low back pain with an overlying strain
    causing predominantly low back and right hip pain and with some non-
    verifiable radicular pain in the right leg.
    Dr. Wilburn recommended Ms. Emory resume “aggressive conservative treatment,”
    including physical therapy and possibly a functional capacity evaluation. He also
    confirmed that Ms. Emory’s work accident “did contribute more than 51% to causing her
    2
    Ms. Emory offered an unsigned “to whom it may concern” letter, purportedly taking Ms. Emory off work until she
    received a neurosurgical examination. The Court upheld Epic’s objection and excluded this letter as hearsay.
    Specifically, the Court found that the typed name of NP Hutton on the document, without some indication of an
    intent to create an electronic signature, was insufficient to qualify as a hearsay exception under Rule 0800-02-21-
    .16(6)(b) of the Tennessee Compilation Rules and Regulations. The Court also found that the letter was not a
    medical record contemplated by the Rule.
    3
    injury and her current diagnosis.” He did not think it was appropriate for him to address
    or dispute the work restrictions assigned by Ms. Emory’s prior providers.3
    Ms. Emory requested that the Court award TTD benefits, plus the statutory
    penalty, from December 21, 2016, through the present. She also sought an order
    compelling Epic to provide a return visit and continuing treatment with Dr. Wilburn, as
    well as mileage for her travel to medical appointments. Ms. Emory also requested an
    award of attorney fees.
    Epic countered that Ms. Emory is not entitled to TTD benefits for the period after
    she stopped treating at Seven Springs. It asserted she provided no admissible medical
    proof of total disability during that time and pointed to the fact that Dr. Wilburn failed to
    address her work status. Regarding the period when the providers at Seven Springs took
    Ms. Emory off work, Epic contended that the Court should disregard those medical
    opinions as they were based on Ms. Emory’s false statements that Epic required her to
    work outside of her light duty restrictions. As to Ms. Emory’s request for medical
    treatment with Dr. Wilburn, Epic’s attorney stated that Ms. Emory had not requested a
    return appointment, Epic was not denying any medical treatment, and Ms. Emory was
    welcome to return to Dr. Wilburn at any time.
    The parties stipulated that Ms. Emory’s compensation rate is $209.18.
    Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
    Ms. Emory need not prove every element of her claim by a preponderance of the
    evidence in order to obtain relief at an expedited hearing. Instead, she must come
    forward with sufficient evidence from which this Court might determine she is likely to
    prevail at a hearing on the merits. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(1) (2017);
    McCord v. Advantage Human Resourcing, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 6, at
    *7-8, 9 (Mar. 27, 2015).
    Temporary Disability Benefits
    Ms. Emory seeks payment of TTD benefits.4 An injured worker is eligible for
    TTD benefits if: (1) the worker’s disability arose due to a compensable injury; (2) there is
    a causal connection between the injury and the inability to work; and (3) the worker
    established the duration of the period of disability. Jones v. Crencor Leasing and Sales,
    3
    Dr. Wilburn gave a deposition in this matter, but since his testimony was consistent with his treatment note and his
    letter, the Court will not summarize it in detail. However, he did testify generally that the work restrictions given by
    Ms. Emory’s other providers were reasonable.
    4
    The parties acknowledged during the hearing that, in spite of the dispute over whether Ms. Emory exceeded her
    light duty restrictions, she worked for Epic while under those restrictions and was not entitled to temporary partial
    disability benefits.
    4
    TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 48, at *7 (Dec. 11, 2015).
    Ms. Emory presented unrebutted and unambiguous proof of a period of disability
    causally connected to her work injury. This proof took the form of medical instructions
    from Seven Springs taking her completely off work. Epic offered no explanation or any
    proof as to why it did not pay TTD benefits while Ms. Emory was off work. Its argument
    as to why it should not now be required to pay those benefits is far from persuasive.
    First, Ms. Emory’s testimony and her supervisor’s affidavit constitute unrebutted
    proof that Epic required Ms. Emory to exceed her light duty restrictions. Epic’s attempt
    to characterize Ms. Emory’s non-compliant work activities as voluntary is completely
    unsupported by any evidence. Thus, Epic has not shown that the providers at Seven
    Springs based their work restrictions on inaccurate information. Further, even if Epic
    proved it had complied with the light duty restrictions, this would not necessarily mean
    the medical providers would not have taken Ms. Emory off work. The Court cannot
    substitute its judgment for that of the medical professionals. See Scott v. Integrity
    Staffing Solutions, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 24, at *8-9 (August 18, 2015).
    For these reasons, the Court finds Ms. Emory is likely to prove entitlement to TTD
    benefits from December 21, 2016, through February 10, 2017, at a hearing on the merits.
    Regarding TTD for other periods claimed by Ms. Emory, Dr. Wilburn, whom both
    parties acknowledged as the authorized treating physician (ATP), has not yet offered an
    opinion regarding Ms. Emory’s ability to work following the expiration of the Seven
    Springs restrictions. If he does so, Ms. Emory may be entitled to additional disability
    benefits. However, in the absence of medical proof of disability, the Court cannot find at
    this time that Ms. Emory has proven she is likely to succeed at a hearing on the merits
    that she is entitled to TTD benefits from February 11 through the present.
    Medical Benefits
    The Court now addresses Ms. Emory’s request for medical benefits. Under the
    Workers’ Compensation Law, “the employer or the employer’s agent shall furnish, free
    of charge to the employee, such medical and surgical treatment . . . made reasonably
    necessary by accident[.]” Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-204(a)(1)(A). Employers are also
    required to offer a panel of physicians “from which the injured employee shall select one
    (1) to be the treating physician.” See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-204(a)(3)(A)(i).
    The parties agreed that Dr. Wilburn is Ms. Emory’s ATP. Epic must therefore
    provide Ms. Emory with a return appointment to Dr. Wilburn, as well as any treatment he
    deems reasonably necessary because of her work accident.
    Ms. Emory also requested mileage reimbursement. She may well be entitled to
    mileage under Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-204(a)(6)(a), which provides for
    5
    reimbursement of reasonable travel expenses incurred when an employee must travel
    more than fifteen miles for authorized medical treatment. However, because Ms. Emory
    did not submit any proof of her actual mileage, the Court cannot award a specific amount
    at this time.
    Epic argued during the hearing that Ms. Emory never filed a PBD for mileage
    reimbursement or a return to Dr. Wilburn. To the extent Epic may have intended to
    suggest the Court has no jurisdiction to address these issues at this time, such a
    suggestion would be incorrect. The DCN in this case clearly identified “Medical
    Benefits” as one of the disputed issues to be resolved, and both mileage and continuing
    treatment with Dr. Wilburn are included in that category. If Epic made this argument in
    an attempt to excuse its failure to schedule a return to Dr. Wilburn, it is equally
    unpersuasive. Dr. Wilburn recommended in both his treatment note and his letter to
    Epic’s attorney that Ms. Emory should resume conservative treatment. Once Epic was
    aware of that recommendation, it should have been unnecessary for Ms. Emory to file a
    PBD or even request additional treatment before Epic provided the recommended
    physical therapy or a return to Dr. Wilburn.
    Similarly, Epic introduced medical records and elicited testimony from Ms. Emory
    regarding missed therapy appointments and questions about her use of narcotic
    prescriptions while treating with Seven Springs. Again, however, Epic never argued or
    produced any proof that these issues were related in any way to its failure to provide
    statutorily-required benefits. In light of the fact that compensability was not a disputed
    issue, as well as Epic’s agreement that Dr. Wilburn remains Ms. Emory’s ATP, the
    insinuations about Ms. Emory’s narcotic use are as irrelevant as they are unseemly.
    Penalties
    Ms. Emory also seeks an order imposing a penalty pursuant to Tennessee Code
    Annotated section 50-6-205(b)(3), which provides:
    In addition to any other penalty provided by law, if an employer, trust or
    pool or an employer’s insurer fails to pay, or untimely pays, temporary
    disability benefits within twenty (20) days after the employer has
    knowledge of any disability that would qualify for benefits under this
    chapter, a workers’ compensation judge shall have the authority to assess
    against the employer, trust or pool or the employer’s insurer a civil penalty
    in addition to the temporary disability benefits that are due to the employee.
    The penalty, if assessed, shall be in an amount equal to twenty-five percent
    (25%) of the temporary disability benefits that were not paid in accordance
    with this subsection (b). Furthermore, the penalty may be assessed as to all
    temporary disability benefits that are determined not to be paid in
    compliance with this subsection (b).
    6
    That Epic had knowledge of Ms. Emory’s disability is clear and undisputed. In
    spite of this knowledge, Epic not only failed to pay temporary disability benefits within
    twenty days of receiving information, it also continued to deny payment of those benefits
    without any legal justification for almost a year. The Court has already determined that
    Ms. Emory appears likely to establish entitlement to TTD benefits, and Epic must pay
    those benefits under this Order. As a result, Ms. Emory has, in fact, “qualif[ied] for
    benefits under this chapter,” as required by Section 50-6-205(b)(3). The Court therefore
    assesses a penalty against Epic in the amount of twenty-five percent of the TTD benefits
    due to Ms. Emory for the period of December 21, 2016, through February 10, 2017.
    In addition to its failure to provide TTD benefits, Epic initially failed to provide
    Ms. Emory a panel of physicians. Instead, it simply sent her to Fast Pace, where she
    treated for several weeks. When Fast Pace referred Ms. Emory for orthopedic treatment,
    Epic gave her the option of choosing between two providers, Dr. Fontenot and his nurse
    practitioner. This did not constitute a valid panel under Section 50-6-204(a)(3)(A)(i),
    which requires that a panel must include “a group of three (3) or more independent
    reputable physicians.” Thus, Epic failed to provide a panel of physicians to Ms. Emory
    for at least six months after her injury. It then compounded the delay another two months
    by including a physician on the panel who does not treat back injuries.
    Tennessee Compilation Rules and Regulations 0800-02-01-.25(1) provides:
    [U]pon notice of any workplace injury, other than a minor injury for which
    no person could reasonably believe requires treatment from a physician, the
    employer shall immediately provide the injured employee a panel of
    physicians[.] . . . In any case where the employer fails to provide a panel of
    physicians to the employee within a reasonable amount of time, but in no
    instance longer than five (5) business days from the date the employer has
    notice of an injury . . . the employer may be assessed a civil penalty, not
    to exceed five thousand dollars ($5,000).
    Likewise, Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-118(12) provides that the Penalty Unit
    may collect a penalty for the “failure of an employer to timely provide a panel of
    physicians that meets the statutory requirements [of the law].”
    Epic’s actions contravened both rule and statute. Accordingly, the Court refers the
    case to the Penalty Unit for its consideration of the assessment of a penalty for Epic’s
    failure to timely provide Ms. Emory a panel of physicians.
    Attorney Fees
    Ms. Emory seeks fees pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-
    7
    226(d)(1)(B), which provides:
    In addition to attorneys' fees provided for in this section, the court of
    workers' compensation claims may award reasonable attorneys' fees and
    reasonable costs, including reasonable and necessary court reporter
    expenses and expert witness fees, for depositions and trials incurred when
    the employer:
    Wrongfully denies a claim by filing a timely notice of denial, or fails to
    timely initiate any of the benefits to which the employee is entitled under
    this chapter, including medical benefits under § 50-6-204 or temporary or
    permanent disability benefits under § 50-6-207, if the workers'
    compensation judge makes a finding that such benefits were owed at an
    expedited hearing or compensation hearing.
    The Appeals Board held that this provision does not require determination of fee
    requests “at an interlocutory stage of the case” but suggested such a determination might
    be appropriate in some cases. It noted that “each case must be evaluated based on the
    particular circumstances presented,” although it did not elaborate as to what
    circumstances should be considered. See Andrews v. Yates Services, LLC, 2017 TN Wrk.
    Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 35, at *7-8 (May 23, 2017).
    Mindful of “the twists and turns inherent in litigation” described in Andrews, the
    Court notes that the salient facts of this case will not change. Epic acknowledged Ms.
    Emory suffered a compensable injury but provided no temporary disability benefits and
    inadequate medical panels. The medical panel issue was not resolved until Ms. Emory
    retained counsel and filed the PBD. Epic denied TTD benefits without explanation or
    any indication it would have ever paid them voluntarily. As Ms. Emory’s counsel argued
    during the hearing, Epic showed a blatant disregard of the basic provisions of the
    Workers’ Compensation Law, which forced her attorneys to expend significant time and
    effort to get benefits for someone who has received no wages or disability benefits for
    almost a year. These appear to be the precise circumstances described by the statute –
    Epic “fail[ed] to timely initiate any of the benefits to which the employee is entitled
    under this chapter, including medical benefits under § 50-6-204 or temporary or
    permanent disability benefits” and this Court has made “a finding that such benefits were
    owed at an expedited hearing.”
    Based on these facts, the Court sees no value in delaying an award of attorney
    fees.5 Further, it agrees with Ms. Emory that a general refusal to award interlocutory fees
    might discourage attorney involvement in “small value” cases where an employee’s
    5
    The Court also notes that, unlike this case, the trial court in Andrews determined that the employee was not entitled
    to attorney fees. That may have been a factor in the Board’s conclusion that it was premature to address the claim
    for attorney fees at that stage of the case.
    8
    permanent disability benefits would be so small as to make representation financially
    unfeasible. If the purpose of Section 226(d)(1)(B) was to encourage attorneys to accept
    more workers’ compensation cases and thus provide more representation for injured
    employees, that purpose might be frustrated if attorneys are forced to wait until the
    conclusion of a case before requesting and receiving these additional fees.
    Based on these considerations, the Court finds that an award of attorney fees is
    appropriate at this stage of this case.
    IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows:
    1. Epic shall continue to provide Ms. Emory with medical treatment made reasonably
    necessary by her August 29, 2016 injury in accordance with Tennessee Code
    Annotated section 50-6-204. Dr. Wilburn shall continue to be the authorized
    treating physician.
    2. Epic shall pay Ms. Emory temporary total disability benefits in the amount of
    $1,553.91 for the period of December 21, 2016, through February 10, 2017.
    3. Epic shall pay Ms. Emory an additional twenty-five percent penalty in the amount
    of $388.48.
    4. Ms. Emory’s requests for mileage benefits are denied at this time.
    5. The amount of Ms. Emory’s attorney fee shall be determined at a later date. Ms.
    Emory’s counsel shall submit a fee request, affidavit, and any supporting
    documentation on or before December 22, 2017. Epic shall submit any response
    on or before January 12, 2018.
    6. This matter is set for a Scheduling Hearing on February 14, 2018, at 9:00 a.m.
    The parties must call 615-741-2112 or toll free at 855-874-0473 to participate.
    Failure to call in may result in a determination of the issues without the parties’
    participation. All conferences are set using Central Time (CT).
    7. Unless interlocutory appeal of the Expedited Hearing Order is filed, compliance
    with this Order must occur no later than seven business days from the date of entry
    of this Order as required by Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-239(d)(3).
    The Insurer or Self-Insured Employer must submit confirmation of compliance
    with this Order to the Bureau by email to WCCompliance.Program@tn.gov no
    later than the seventh business day after entry of this Order. Failure to submit the
    necessary confirmation within the period of compliance may result in a penalty
    assessment for non-compliance.
    9
    8. For questions regarding compliance, please contact the Workers’ Compensation
    Compliance Unit via email at WCCompliance.Program@tn.gov.
    ENTERED this the 11th day of December, 2017.
    _____________________________________
    Judge Dale Tipps
    Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims
    APPENDIX
    Exhibits:
    1. Affidavit of Wendy Emory
    2. Affidavit of Debbie Mashburn
    3. Form C-42 Choice of Physicians
    4. Deposition transcript of Dr. Douglas Wilburn
    5. Records from Seven Springs Orthopaedics
    6. Records from Express Meds
    7. Express Med off-work note (Identification Only)
    8. Records from Advanced Neurology Associates
    9. Treatment note and letter from Dr. Wilburn
    10. Records from Fast Pace Medical Clinic
    11. Contract of Employment
    12. Discharge Summary from Star Physical Therapy
    13. Hospitality Aide Job Description (Identification Only)
    Technical record:
    1. Petition for Benefit Determination
    2. Dispute Certification Notice
    3. Request for Expedited Hearing
    4. Parties’ Pre-Hearing Statements
    10
    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
    I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the Expedited Hearing Order was
    sent to the following recipients by the following methods of service on this the 11th day
    of December, 2017.
    Name                     Certified    Via         Via Service sent to:
    Mail        Fax        Email
    Cameron Hoffmeyer                                  X   choffmeyer@bhsdlaw.com
    Employee’s Attorney
    Allen Grant                                       X    agrant@eraclides.com
    Employer’s Attorney
    _____________________________________
    Penny Shrum, Clerk of Court
    Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims
    WC.CourtClerk@tn.gov
    11
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2017-05-0082

Citation Numbers: 2017 TN WC 225

Judges: Dale Tipps

Filed Date: 12/11/2017

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 1/9/2021