Freddie Jane Cook v. Monroe Farmers Coop. 03S01-9707-CV-00090
Authoring Judge: Roger E. Thayer, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Earl Murphy,
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The appeal has resulted from a decision of the trial court to dismiss the complaint. The Circuit Judge found the employee had failed to establish she had sustained an injury as a result of her work activities on January 12, 1994. Plaintiff, Freddie Jane Cook, age 55 years, had been employed by defendant, Monroe Farmers Cooperation, for about 6 _ years. She worked as a cashier which involved waiting on customers, stocking, etc. On the day in question, she was walking through a door carrying a gasoline can when she stepped on the threshold board of the door and lost her balance causing her to twist her body. She testified her knees buckled but she did not fall to the floor. She reported the incident to her employer and was referred to a doctor who returned her to work. She continued to work until about January 22. On January 28th she was admitted to a hospital for treatment of depression and anxiety. She remained in the hospital for about thirteen days. She testified the incident at work caused her to suffer neck, arm and knee pain. On cross-examination she admitted having prior problems with depression and anxiety. She said she found it stressful waiting on customers and dealing with her boss; that on occasion she became so nervous she would get physically ill at work and have to stay at home a day or two; that she had sexual and emotional abuse during childhood; had been involved in a series of abusive marriages; she was presently dealing with a husband who had been unfaithful and had a drinking problem; she had been subject to a criminal assault by a step-daughter and she had been convicted of an aggravated assault of a prior husband's girlfriend. Plaintiff's psychiatrist, Dr. Jeffrey D. Greenwood, testified by deposition. He had seen her for several years prior to the incident at work. He stated he hospitalized her during January 1994 for recurrent depression and generalized anxiety problems which was the same diagnosis as in previous visits. When asked if the incident at work was the proximate cause of her hospitalization, he declined to say it was but preferred to say it was "related" to her hospitalization. He was of the opinion the marital infidelity was a large part of the reason for hospital treatment. He also felt her problems with other family members, the history of abuse, etc. all related 2
Knox
Workers Compensation Panel
Gwendolyn Sue Mulkey v. Palm Beach Company 03S01-9706-CV-00069
Authoring Judge: Roger E. Thayer, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Harold Wimberly,
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The appeal has been perfected by the employee, Gwendolyn Sue Mulkey, from a decision of the trial court resulting in a dismissal of the complaint. The Circuit Judge found the employee had failed to establish she had sustained an injury as a result of her work activities on August 13, 1993. Plaintiff, age 42 years, had worked for defendant, Palm Beach Company, for a number of years. She was engaged in sewing work when she said she was lifting a bundle of coats and felt something pull in her neck. Later the same day, she testified she was lifting above her head and felt a pull in her low back. She went to see a doctor furnished by her employer and was returned to light duty work. She continued working until January 31, 1994, when she was terminated because the employer concluded there was no work available under the restrictions imposed by the doctor. She eventually found other employment and was working 2-22 hours a week as a janitor. She testified this type of work caused her neck and back to hurt. The record indicates that she had sustained several work-related injuries in previous years and had been treated for a rib injury, a carpal tunnel syndrome injury and a shoulder injury. All of the expert medical testimony was by deposition. Dr. Jonathan N. Degnan, an orthopedic surgeon, first saw plaintiff on March 17, 1994, which was about seven months after the activities in question. He testified she complained of neck pain on the initial visit but did not complain of low back problems until the September 1994 visit. He found degenerative disc disease which was not work-related. He gave her a 9% impairment to the body as a whole and related the injury to her work duties upon the assumption the history given to him was accurate. In giving the history, she told the doctor she had recovered from all prior injuries and was not suffering from neck and back pain before August 1993. Dr. Robert E. Finelli, a neurosurgeon, testified he had treated plaintiff for some of her prior injuries. He saw her during March 1993 (about 5 months before incident) and she had complaints then of neck and arm pain. He next saw her on 2
Knox
Workers Compensation Panel
Freda Pack v. Cigna Property & Casualty Co. 03S01-9706-CV-00066
Authoring Judge: William H. Inman, Senior Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. W. Dale Young,
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with T.C.A. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. Because arthritis is not an occupational disease and is normally not caused by trauma but is part of the aging process and thus not within the ambit of the Workers' Compensation Law, this case is not without its difficulties as a matter of law. The plaintiff is 54 years old and at the time of trial had been employed by the defendant in a non-skilled position for 17 years. she has a litany of health problems not relevant to this case, which arises from a job-related accident on October 24, 1991 and a second job-related accident on October 5, 1993, involving injuries to her left knee. The first accident occurred when the plaintiff twisted her left knee in a misstep. She was treated by a panel physician who referred her to an orthopedic specialist, Dr. Bryan Smalley, who diagnosed an internal derangement of hr knee and performed a diagnostic arthroscopy on December 9, 1991. Because her rehabilitation was slow, the plaintiff was referred to Dr. William Hovis, who also performed an arthroscopy which diminished pain and soreness. She returned to work with limitations on climbing or kneeling. On July 9, 1993, Dr. Hovis opined that the plaintiff had a five percent disability to her left leg due to the aggravation of an arthritic condition. As stated, the plaintiff suffered another injury to her left leg on October 5, 1993 when she slipped while pushing a heavy buggy causing her to hyper- extend her left knee in a backward manner. For this injury she was treated by Dr. William K. Bell, an orthopedic surgeon in Maryville. He found that the 2
Larry Sizemore v. City of Dickson 01S01-9701-CV-00022
Authoring Judge: William Michael Maloan, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Allan Wallace,
This workers' compensation appeal from the Dickson County Circuit Court has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated _5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. In this appeal, the plaintiff contends the panel should reverse the trial court's grant of summary judgment. We conclude summary judgment to be appropriate and affirm the trial court. The plaintiff, Larry Sizemore, is a policeman for the City of Dickson. He was on vacation for approximately two weeks when he sustained a heart attack while watching television at home on August 15, 1994. The plaintiff filed suit for worker's compensation benefits specifically relying on the statutory presumption of compensability afforded law enforcement personnel in T.C.A. _7-51- 21, which states: ...there shall be and there is hereby established a presumption that any impairment of health of such law enforcement officers caused by hypertension or heart disease resulting in hospitalization, medical treatment or any disability, shall be presumed (unless the contrary is shown by competent medical evidence) to have occurred or to be due to accidental injury suffered in the course of employment.... The defendant answered and denied the plaintiff had sustained a compensable injury. The defendant further filed a motion for summary judgment supported by portions of depositions of the plaintiff and of Dr. Taylor Malone Wray who gave the following testimony: A. My opinion is there is no causal relationship between his work as a police officer and his subsequent heart attack. Q. Do you have an opinion within a reasonable degree of medical certainty as to what did cause his heart attack? A. Well, the heart attack was caused by coronary atherosclerosis, which is a buildup of fatty plaque in the heart arteries. The plaintiff responded with the counter affidavit of Dr. Marshall Crenshaw which states, in part: Mr. Sizemore's coronary artery disease developed in the setting of several risk 2
Dickson
Workers Compensation Panel
Jacqueline Marie Redden v. Synthetic Industries and The Home Insurance Company 03S01-9703-CV-00025
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Senior Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Arnold A. Stulce, Jr.
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. This appeal has been perfected by plaintiff, Jacqueline Marie Redden, from the trial court's decision in declining to increase an original award of 2% permanent partial disability to the body as a whole after a reconsideration hearing conducted pursuant to the provisions of T.C.A. _ 5-6-241(a)(2). Plaintiff contends the evidence preponderates against the finding of the trial court. Defendants, Synthetic Industries and The Home Insurance Company, argue the evidence before the court was insufficient to support an increased award. The facts are not in great dispute. Employee Redden sustained a work- related injury on August 9, 1992, while pushing a dolly loaded with yarn. The injury was to her low back. A final decree was entered in the Circuit Court of Hamilton County on January 19, 1995, approving a settlement agreement providing for a 2% permanent partial disability award to the body as a whole. Since the accident occurred shortly after the effective date of the 1992 amendments to the W orkers' Compensation Act and the employee had returned to work at a wage equal to or greater than that received before the accident, the award was capped at 2 _ times the medical impairment rating of 8%. Upon returning to work, plaintiff was given a job "reeling denies", which she testified involved hooking yarn to a machine and was lighter duty work. However, this job was only of a temporary nature. Later she was asked if she could do office work to which she replied she could perform. A job of this nature never materialized. She was later offered a job "doffing" and was told that this was all the company had to offer. The job involved considerable physical activity and defendant employer sent her to see a physical therapist for the purpose of determining whether she could perform the required duties of bending, lifting, etc. The therapist concluded she was not able to do this type of work because of her injury. Since there was no other job available that she could handle with her restrictions, she was eventually terminated. The record is silent as to the exact termination date but it was sometime during or after February, 1995. 2
Sharon Gail Jones v. Modine Manufacturing Company and Sentry Insurance Company 03S01-9703-CV-00028
Authoring Judge: Roger E. Thayer, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. James B. Scott,
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The appeal has been perfected by defendants, Modine Manufacturing Company and Sentry Insurance Company, from a decision of the trial court awarding plaintiff, Sharon Gail Jones, 45% permanent partial disability to her right arm. Two issues are being raised by the employer and insurance company. First, it is argued the award is excessive. Second, it is insisted the trial court was in error in holding defendants liable for charges and expenses of Dr. Paul T. Naylor, an orthopedic surgeon. Plaintiff is 42 years of age and a high school graduate. During September 1995 she began to have problems with her hand and arm tingling and being painful. She reported the problem to her employer and was sent to see Dr. R. Alan Rice, a family practitioner. Dr. Rice eventually referred her to Dr. Joseph C. DeFiore, an orthopedic surgeon. Dr. DeFiore saw her three times. One visit was during November 1995 and the other two visits were during December of the same year. Plaintiff testified that all he did was to give her a cortisone shot and advised her to return to light duty work. She returned to work but still had the same problems. At her last visit, she said he advised her to change jobs and released her. The doctor testified she had a carpal tunnel syndrome injury and was of the opinion she had no medical impairment. He admitted releasing her and recommending that she should not do repetitive work as she had performed in the past. Plaintiff testified she was laid-off about January 1996 and was never called back to work. During this month, counsel filed a motion requesting her employer to designate a panel of three orthopedic surgeons for treatment. Plaintiff continued to have problems with her injury while off from work and sought treatment from Dr. Paul T. Naylor, another orthopedic surgeon. Dr. Naylor saw her three times also: April 18, 1996, September 19, 1996 and October 14, 1996. He also found she was suffering from a carpal tunnel syndrome injury and told plaintiff that surgery was necessary to relieve some of her problems. The doctor was 2
