Stocklin, YZ v. Barrett Distribution ( 2019 )


Menu:
  •                                                                                  FILED
    Feb 06, 2019
    10:20 AM(CT)
    TENNESSEE COURT OF
    WORKERS' COMPENSATION
    CLAIMS
    TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
    IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS
    AT MEMPHIS
    YZ STOCKLIN,                               )   Docket No. 2017-08-1014
    Employee,                         )
    v.                                         )
    BARRETT DISTRIBUTION,                      )   State File No. 59533-2015
    Employer,                         )
    and                                        )
    AMGUARD INSURANCE CO.,                     )   Judge Joshua Davis Baker
    Carrier.                          )
    COMPENSATION HEARING ORDER
    The Court convened a compensation hearing on January 24, 2019. The main legal
    issue is whether Mr. Stocklin is permanently and totally disabled. Considering his
    anatomical impairment, physical limitations and pain, work history, testimony and the
    local job market, the Court holds Mr. Stocklin is permanently and totally disabled.
    History of Claim
    Mr. Stocklin, born October 13, 1959, is a fifty-nine-year-old resident of Shelby
    County, Tennessee. He graduated high school and has an associate’s degree in criminal
    justice. After graduating, he worked for one year as a prison guard. He applied for a
    state trooper position but did not get the job. Afterward, Mr. Stocklin worked warehouse
    jobs and eventually worked for Barrett Manufacturing. He worked for Barrett for fifteen
    years and was promoted to warehouse manager before suffering a severe injury.
    On July 17, 2015, Mr. Stocklin arrived at Barrett early and noticed that the
    entrance’s large metal gate, weighing approximately 2,500 pounds, was only partially
    opened. He stopped his car to open the gate. As he opened it, the gate support collapsed,
    and the gate fell on him. Mr. Stocklin suffered near-amputation of his left foot at the
    ankle and also injured his back and left knee. He immediately went to the hospital for
    surgery.
    Barrett accepted the claim, and several physicians treated Mr. Stocklin. Dr.
    Francis Camillo diagnosed a low back vertebral fracture and treated him conservatively.
    Dr. Edward Perez performed two surgeries to Mr. Stocklin’s left ankle to treat his open
    wound and insert hardware to repair his compound fracture. Dr. Frederick Azar
    diagnosed a posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) tear and performed arthroscopic surgery
    after conservative treatment failed. In total, his injuries collectively resulted in fourteen-
    percent whole body impairment.1
    Dr. Perez and Dr. Azar both restricted Mr. Stocklin to sedentary work. In addition
    to this restriction, Dr. Perez certified that he could not return to his prior occupation due
    to the severity of his injury. However, he also stated that Mr. Stocklin “can work in
    many other things that do not require the physical amount of work relative to his previous
    job.” Dr. Perez placed Mr. Stocklin at maximum medical improvement on April 20,
    2017. Mr. Stocklin never returned to Dr. Perez after his release.
    Mr. Stocklin testified that the accident continues to cause intense pain requiring
    medication. He cannot sit or stand for long periods of time and must switch positions
    often to relieve his pain. He only sleeps about four hours per night, and the pain
    medication makes him drowsy. Mr. Stocklin described being in a “fog” after taking the
    medication, which was testimony his wife echoed. Mr. Stocklin stated that when he
    drove his daughter to school—a trip of only seven miles—he sometimes fell asleep in the
    car line. For this reason and due to his inability to sit for extended periods, Mr. Stocklin
    testified he cannot travel.
    Mr. Stocklin missed a significant amount of work due to his injuries and received
    temporary disability benefits during his absence. He earned $1,217.57 per week,
    resulting in a weekly compensation rate of $730.53.
    Two vocational experts, Dr. David Strauser and Mr. David Earl Stewart, evaluated
    Mr. Stocklin and reached opposite conclusions. Dr. Strauser determined that Mr.
    Stocklin experienced “a complete loss of earning capacity” because of the accident and
    could only perform sedentary work. He testified that although Mr. Stocklin has a college
    education, solid work history, and managerial experience in a warehouse setting, his
    constant pain in conjunction with his inability to walk without a cane and maintain a
    seated or standing position for more than a few minutes at a time prohibit him from
    finding and maintaining a new job. He also said the constant pain would make it hard for
    him to learn the requirements of a new position.
    1
    Dr. Perez assigned eight-percent impairment, Dr. Azar assigned one percent, and Dr. Camillo assigned
    five percent.
    2
    Mr. Stewart stated that Mr. Stocklin suffered a forty-six percent vocational
    disability based on his physical limitations, education and work history. Mr. Stewart did
    not factor in Mr. Stocklin’s complaints of pain, non-prescribed use of a cane, and use of
    pain medication when reaching his opinion, since he considered these factors too
    subjective to incorporate into the analysis.
    Despite finding that Mr. Stocklin suffered only a forty-six percent vocational
    disability, Mr. Stewart identified only eleven open positions in the greater Memphis area
    suitable for Mr. Stocklin. Five of these eleven positions were in the security industry.
    Dr. Strauser testified that Mr. Stocklin could not maintain any of the identified jobs.
    In addition to the positions Mr. Stewart identified, Barrett also engaged Work
    Finders to seek a position for Mr. Stocklin. Work Finders contacted him in the fall of
    2018 to discuss an opportunity as a warehouse manager. Mr. Stocklin said that he
    received the call without warning and had no idea who Work Finders represented, so he
    declined.
    Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
    Mr. Stocklin must prove all elements of his case by a preponderance of the
    evidence. Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(6) (2018). As the parties agreed, Mr. Stocklin
    suffered a compensable accident resulting in permanent impairment and has the right to
    future medical treatment for his injuries.
    Permanent Disability
    The central legal issue is whether he is permanently and totally disabled. The
    Court finds that he is.
    When an injury “totally incapacitates the employee from working at an occupation
    that brings the employee an income, the employee shall be considered totally disabled[.]”
    Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-207(4)(B). The assessment of permanent total disability is
    based on numerous factors, including the employee’s skills and training, education, age,
    local job opportunities, and the capacity to work at the kinds of employment available in
    the disabled condition. Roberson v. Loretto Casket Co., 
    722 S.W.2d 380
    , 384 (Tenn.
    1986). Although a rating of anatomical disability by a medical expert is also one of the
    relevant factors, “the vocational disability is not restricted to the precise estimate of
    anatomical disability made by a medical witness.” Henson v. City of Lawrenceburg, 
    851 S.W.2d 809
    , 812 (Tenn. 1993). In addition, the employee’s “own assessment of [his]
    physical condition and resulting disability is competent testimony that should be
    considered[.]” McIlvain v. Russell Stover Candies, Inc., 
    996 S.W.2d 179
    , 183 (Tenn.
    3
    1999).
    In considering these factors, the Court holds that Mr. Stocklin cannot find and
    maintain work to provide income because of his constant pain, physical limitations, age,
    work history, and the local job market. Mr. Stocklin can neither sit nor stand for more
    than a short period of time, and he uses a cane to walk. The Court noticed that
    throughout the hearing, Mr. Stocklin repeatedly switched positions and was in obvious
    pain. He takes pain medication that makes him drowsy and affects his driving.
    While Mr. Stocklin has a college education and extensive work background in
    warehouse operations and management, the Court finds neither of these factors assistive
    in gaining employment. He has an associate’s degree in criminal justice but worked in
    the field for only one year as a prison guard, so he has no managerial experience in
    criminal justice. Additionally, his physical limitations, especially his inability to sit or
    stand for more than a few minutes, would prevent him from performing law enforcement
    or security work. Mr. Stocklin could not chase a suspect or protect others or property
    from harm in his physical condition.
    These same physical limitations preclude Mr. Stocklin from further work in
    warehouse management. While he has extensive experience in this setting, Mr. Stocklin
    testified that all of these positions still require physical labor. He said that although he
    supervised others, he still performed general warehouse duties such as packaging and
    transporting items in the warehouse and driving a forklift when filling in for absent
    employees. Because he can no longer do any of those tasks, the Court holds he could not
    find and maintain work as a warehouse manager.
    The Court also finds that Mr. Stocklin’s age would adversely affect his
    employment search. Although he has a solid work history and ability to learn new tasks,
    he is now fifty-nine years old and has been out of the workforce for several years. Plus,
    as Dr. Strauser stated, his constant pain would inhibit his ability to learn new workplace
    skills.
    The local job market is also not favorable for Mr. Stocklin, as the proof showed
    very few jobs available in his disabled condition. Dr. Strauser did not provide a labor
    market analysis after determining Mr. Stocklin could not work. Also, Mr. Stewart could
    only identify eleven open positions suitable for Mr. Stocklin. Of those eleven positions,
    five involved security work, which the Court finds he could not perform. Additionally,
    no proof suggested that Mr. Stocklin could perform the duties of the warehouse
    management position suggested through Work Finders.
    Finally, Mr. Stocklin believes he can no longer work. The Court found him
    credible. His extensive, unblemished work history leads the Court to believe that Mr.
    4
    Stocklin would work if he could.
    For all these reasons, the Court holds that Mr. Stocklin is permanently and totally
    disabled. He is, therefore, entitled to weekly benefits from April 21, 2017, the day after
    MMI,2 “until [he] is, by age, eligible for full benefits in the Old Age Insurance Benefit
    Program under the Social Security Act.” See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-207(4)(A)(i).
    Attorney Fee and Recalculated Award
    Before the Court can award an attorney fee in excess of $10,000, Tennessee Code
    Annotated section 50-6-226(a)(2)(C) requires specific findings of the factors in
    Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 8, Rule of Professional Conduct 1.5, which include:
    (1) the time and labor required, the novelty and difficulty of the questions
    involved, and the skill requisite to perform the legal service properly;
    (2) the likelihood, if apparent to the client, that the acceptance of the
    particular employment will preclude other employment by the lawyer;
    (3) the fee customarily charged in the locality for similar legal services;
    (4) the amount involved and the results obtained;
    (5) the time limitations imposed by the client or by the circumstances;
    (6) the nature and length of the professional relationship with the client;
    (7) the experience, reputation, and ability of the lawyer or lawyers
    performing the services;
    (8) whether the fee is fixed or contingent;
    (9) prior advertisements or statements by the lawyer with respect to the fees
    the lawyer charges; and
    (10) whether the fee agreement is in writing.
    The Court finds this case required significant time and expertise on the part of Mr.
    Stocklin’s counsel. A fee of twenty percent is both statutorily-authorized and customary
    in cases brought before this Court. Further, the amount is appropriate for successfully
    shepherding a complicated case through litigation, including detailed medical proof from
    three physicians and vocational experts. All the applicable factors, including the
    experience and ability of Mr. Stocklin’s attorney, favor the requested fee.3 Therefore,
    under Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-207(4)(A)(ii)(a) and section 50-6-
    2
    “Permanent disability benefits, whether total or partial, begin accruing on the date that the employee
    attains maximum medical improvement.” Smith v. U.S. Pipe & Foundry Co., 
    14 S.W.3d 739
    , 745 (Tenn.
    2000).
    3
    Mr. Stocklin’s counsel filed an affidavit concerning her fee after conclusion of the trial. The Court also
    considered the affidavit in making the fee decision.
    5
    207(4)(A)(iii), the Court commutes twenty percent of the first 450 weeks of permanent
    total disability benefits, or $65,747.70, for Mr. Stocklin’s attorney fee.
    Additionally, Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-207(4)(A)(ii)(c) provides:
    After the total amount of the commuted lump sum is determined, the
    amount of the weekly disability benefit shall be recalculated to distribute
    the total remaining permanent total benefits in equal weekly installments
    beginning with the date of entry of the order and terminating on the date the
    employee’s disability benefits terminate pursuant to subdivision (4)(A)(i).
    Mr. Stocklin will be eligible for full benefits in the Old Age Insurance Benefit
    Program on August 13, 2026. The period from April 20, 2017, to August 13, 2026, totals
    486.14 weeks, which at the compensation rate of $730.53 totals benefits of $355,159.30.
    Reducing that amount by the attorney fee of $65,747.70 yields an adjusted total benefit of
    $289,411.60. This amount divided by 486.14 weeks equals an adjusted weekly
    compensation rate of $595.33. Barrett shall pay Mr. Stocklin’s disability benefits at this
    rate.
    IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows:
    1. Barrett shall pay Mr. Stocklin a lump sum of $44,343.11, which is the amount
    permanent disability benefits accrued from April 21, 2017, to February 1,
    2019, minus a credit of $12,105.93 for temporary disability overpayment and
    advance of permanent disability benefits.
    2. Barrett shall continue to make permanent total disability payments to Mr.
    Stocklin at the rate of $595.33 per week until he becomes eligible for full
    social security retirement benefits on October 13, 2026.
    3. Barrett shall provide Mr. Stocklin with future reasonable and necessary
    medical treatment for his injuries.
    4. The Court further finds Mr. Stocklin’s counsel, Monica Rejaei, is entitled to a
    fee of twenty percent, or $65,747.70, of the permanent total disability award.
    The Court commutes this portion of the award to a lump sum. Ms. Rejaei may
    submit a motion for discretionary costs, unless the parties reach an agreement
    on this issue.
    5. Barrett Manufacturing shall pay court costs of $150.00 to the Court Clerk.
    6
    6. Barrett Manufacturing shall prepare and submit to the Court Clerk a Statistical
    Data Form (SD2) within ten business days of this order becoming final.
    7. Absent an appeal to the Appeals Board, this order shall become final thirty
    days after issuance.
    ENTERED ON FEBRUARY 6, 2019.
    _____________________________________
    Judge Joshua Davis Baker
    Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims
    7
    APPENDIX
    Exhibits:
    1.   Dr. Strauser’s CV
    2.   Dr. Strauser’s report
    3.   Dr. Perez’s deposition and attachments
    4.   Dr. Camillo’s deposition and attachments
    5.   Dr. Azar’s deposition and attachments
    6.   Dr. Perez’s physician certification form
    7.   Medical records filed January 10, 2019
    8.   Photograph
    9.   Mr. David Earl Stewart’s report
    Technical record:
    1. Petition for Benefit Determination
    2. Dispute Certification Notice
    3. Scheduling Hearing Order
    4. Barrett’s Witness and Exhibit List
    5. Mr. Stocklin’s Witness List
    6. Mr. Stocklin’s Exhibit List
    7. Barrett’s Pre-Compensation Hearing Statement
    8. Mr. Stocklin’s Pre-Compensation Hearing Statement
    9. Barrett’s Brief
    10. Mr. Stocklin’s Brief
    8
    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
    I certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was sent to the following
    recipients by the following methods of service on February 6, 2019.
    Name                     Certified   First        Via Service sent to:
    Mail       Class       Email
    Mail
    Monica Rejaei,                                    X     mrejaei@nstlaw.com
    Employee’s Attorney                                     cmcgrath@nstlaw.com
    Teri Bernal,                                      X     tbernal@chartwelllaw.com
    Employer’s Attorney
    _____________________________________
    Penny Shrum, Clerk
    Court of Workers' Compensation Claims
    WC.CourtClerk@tn.gov
    9
    II
    I                                                       'I
    Compensation Hearing Order Right to Appeal:
    If you disagree with this Compensation Hearing Order, you may appeal to the Workers'
    Compensation Appeals Board or the Tennessee Supreme Court. To appeal to the Workers'
    Compensation Appeals Board, you must:
    1. Complete the enclosed form entitled: "Compensation Hearing Notice of Appeal," and file
    the form with the Clerk of the Court of Workers' Compensation Claims within thirty
    calendar days of the date the compensation hearing order was filed. When filing the
    Notice of Appeal, you must serve a copy upon the opposing party (or attorney, if
    represented).
    2. You must pay, via check, money order, or credit card, a $75.00 filing fee within ten
    calendar days after filing of the Notice of Appeal. Payments can be made in-person at
    any Bureau office or by U.S. mail, hand-delivery, or other delivery service. In the
    alternative, you may file an Affidavit of Indigency (form available on the Bureau's
    website or any Bureau office) seeking a waiver ofthe filing fee. You must file the fully-
    completed Affidavit of Indigency within ten calendar days of filing the Notice of
    Appeal. Failure to timely pay the filing fee or file the Affidavit of lndigency will
    result in dismissal of your appeal.
    3~   You bear the responsibility of ensuring a complete record on appeal. You may request
    from the court clerk the audio recording of the hearing for a $25.00 fee. A licensed court
    reporter must prepare a transcript and file it with the court clerk within fifteen calendar
    days of the filing the Notice of Appeal. Alternatively, you may file a statement of the
    evidence prepared jointly by both parties within fifteen calendar days of the filing of the
    Notice of Appeal. The statement of the evidence must convey a complete and accurate
    account of the hearing. The Workers' Compensation Judge must approve the statement
    of the evidence before -the record is submitted to the Appeals Board. If the Appeals
    Board is called upon to review testimony or other proof concerning factual matters, the
    absence of a transcript or statement of the evidence can be a significant obstacle to
    meaningful appellate review.
    4. After the Workers' Compensation Judge approves the record and the court clerk transmits
    it to the Appeals Board, a docketing notice will be sent to the parties. The appealing
    party has fifteen calendar days after the date of that notice to submit a brief to the
    Appeals Board. See the Practices and Procedures of the Workers' Compensation
    Appeals Board.
    To appeal your case directly to the Tennessee Supreme Court, the Compensation Hearing
    Order must be final and you must comply with the Tennessee Rules of Appellate
    Procedure. If neither party timely files an appeal with the Appeals Board, the trial court's
    Order will become final by operation of law thirty calendar days after entry. See Tenn.
    Code Ann.§ 50-6-239(c)(7).
    For self-represented litigants: Help from an Ombudsman is available at 800-332-2667.
    II                                                                                                                      I.
    '                                                                                                                       I
    Tennessee Bureau of Workers' Compensation
    220 French Landing Drive, 1-B
    Nashville, TN 37243-1002
    800-332-2667
    AFFIDAVIT OF INDIGENCY
    I,                                                , having been duly sworn according to law, make oath that
    because of my poverty, I am unable to bear the costs of this appeal and request that the filing fee to appeal be
    waived. The following facts support my poverty.
    1. Full Name:_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __                       2. Address: - - - - - - - -- - - --
    3. Telephone Number: - - - - - - - - -                   4. Date of Birth: - - - - -- - - -- -
    5. Names and Ages of All Dependents:
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - Relationship: - - - - - - -- - - -- -
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- --                  Relationship: - - - - - -- - - -- - -
    - - - - - - - - - - -- - -- - - Relationship: - - - -- - -- - - - - -
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -                 Relationship: - - - - - - -- - - -- -
    6. I am employed by: - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - -- - - -- - -
    My employer's address is: - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - - -- - -- - - - -
    My employer's phone number is: - - - -- - - - -- - - - - - -- - - -- - -
    7. My present monthly household income, after federal income and social security taxes are deducted, is:
    $ _ _ _ _ _ __
    8. I receive or expect to receive money from the following sources:
    AFDC            $            per month           beginning
    SSI             $            per month           beginning
    Retirement      $            per month           beginning
    Disability      $            per month           beginning
    Unemployment $               per month           beginning
    Worker's Camp.$              per month           beginning
    Other           $            per month           beginning
    LB-1108 (REV 11/15)                                                                               RDA 11082
    9. My expenses are:     ! ~                                                      li
    I
    '
    Rent/House Payment $              per month     Med icai/Dental $ _ _ ___ per month
    Groceries       $           per month           Telephone       $ _ __ _ _ per month
    Electricity     $           per month           School Supplies $ _ _ _ _ _ per month
    Water           $           per month           Clothing        $ _ _ _ _ _ per month
    Gas             $           per month           Child Care      $ _ _ _ _ _ per month
    Transportation $            per month           Child Support   $ _ _ _ _ _ per month
    Car             $            per month
    Other           $           per month (describe:
    10. Assets:
    Automobile              $ _ _ _ __
    (FMV) - - - - - - - - - -
    Checking/Savings Acct. $ _ _ _ __
    House                   $ _ _ __
    (FMV) - - - - - - - - - -
    Other                   $ _ _ _ __              Describe:_ _ _ _ __ _ __ __
    11. My debts are:
    Amount Owed                     To Whom
    I hereby declare under the penalty of perjury that the foregoing answers are true, correct, and complete
    and that I am financially unable to pay the costs of this appeal.
    APPELLANT
    Sworn and subscribed before me, a notary public, this
    ____ dayof _____________________ , 20_ __
    NOTARY PUBLIC
    My Commission Expires:_ _ _ _ _ _ __
    LB-1108 (REV 11/15)                                                                          RDA 11082
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2017-08-1014

Judges: Joshua Davis Baker

Filed Date: 2/6/2019

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 1/9/2021