Griffis, Carol v. Five Star Food Service
|
|
|
- Samson Newton
- 9 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims and Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Law Winter Griffis, Carol v. Five Star Food Service Tennessee Court of Workers Compensation Claims Follow this and additional works at: This Expedited Hearing by the Department of Labor and Workforce Development, Court of Workers' Compensation Claims is a public document made available by the College of Law Library and the Department of Labor and Workforce Development, Court of Workers' Compensation claims. For more information about this public document, please contact [email protected].
2 FILED February 6, 2015 T:'<COURTOF WORKERS ' CO~fPE:'< SA TIO:'< CLA IM S Tim e: 1:04 P:\ 1 COURT OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION EMPLOYEE: Carol Griffis DOCKET#: STATE FILE#: DATE OF INJURY: August 21,2014 EMPLOYER: Five Star Food Service INSURANCE CARRIER: Key Risk Management EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER DENYING MEDICAL BENEFITS THIS CAUSE came before the undersigned Workers' Compensation Judge upon the Request for Expedited Hearing filed by Carol Griffis, Employee. Considering the positions of the parties, the applicable law and all of the evidence submitted, the Court finds as follows: On December 12, 2014, Mr. Griffis filed a Request for Expedited Hearing with the Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims, Division of Workers' Compensation, pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section to determine if Employer, Five Star Food Service, Inc. ("Five Star"), is obligated to provide medical benefits. The undersigned Workers' Compensation Judge conducted a telephonic Expedited Hearing on February 5, Mr. Griffis participated, prose. Attorney Michael Jones represented Five Star and its Carrier. After considering the parties' arguments, the applicable law, the technical record, and all the testimony and evidence introduced at the Expedited Hearing, the Court concludes that Mr. Griffis is not entitled to the medical benefits requested at this time. ANALYSIS Issue Whether Mr. Griffis presented sufficient evidence to establish that his alleged injury arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of his employment. Evidence Submitted At the hearing, the Court received and considered the following evidence: Exhibit 1: Medical bill, Two Rivers Emergency Phys., PLLC, September 25, 2014 Exhibit 2: Medical bill, Summit Medical Center, September 4, 2014 Exhibit 3: Medical records, Concentra Medical Centers, August 22-29, 2014 Exhibit 4: After Care instructions, Summit Medical Center, August 21,
3 In addition, the Court designates the pleadings below as the technical record: Petition for Benefit Determination, October 8, 2014 Dispute Certification Notice, December 3, 2014 Request for Expedited Hearing, December 12, The witnesses were Mr. Griffis and Robert Landon Martin, Five Star's corporate representative and Director of Risk Management. History of Claim Mr. Griffis is a 35-year-old resident of Wilson County, Tennessee. He testified that he injured his back at work on August 21, 2014, although he is unsure how or when it happened. Later that day, Mr. Griffis went to the emergency room at Summit Medical Center, thinking he may have suffered a heart attack. He testified, without objection, that the emergency room physician, Dr. Cori McKean, ruled out heart attack. She informed him that he experienced a "muscular spasm," and that this type of injury is similar to when a person works out and does not feel soreness or pain until hours later. Mr. Griffis' job is strenuous. He works as a route sales and delivery person for Five Star. He testified that his supervisors have commented that his route requires an employee who is physically fit. Mr. Griffis goes up and down stairs, pushing, pulling and lifting heavy objects all day long, so that in his opinion the type of injury he sustained could easily occur. Dr. McKean discharged Mr. Griffis that same day. Exhibit 4, the "After Care Instructions" state, "The cause of your pain is not yet known." On cross-examination, Mr. Griffis testified he read that statement when he was discharged and disagreed with it because Dr. McKean told him it was "chest pain entering into my back." The form additionally indicates a prescription for Ibuprofen and Flexeril. Mr. Griffis testified, without objection, that these prescriptions treated a muscle spasm. He admitted he received no written document confirming that he experienced a back spasm. Mr. Griffis received authorized care from Dr. William Dutton at Concentra Medical Centers from August 22 through 29, 2014 (Exhibit 3). He also received physical therapy. The physical therapy records were not provided. Dr. Dutton diagnosed "thoracic sprain" and placed Mr. Griffis at maximum medical improvement (MMI) on August 29, Five Star paid for Dr. Dutton's services and physical therapy before denying the claim. Five Star and its Carrier ultimately denied the claim. Mr. Griffis received medical bills in the amount of $ from Two Rivers Emergency Physicians (Exhibit 1) and $1, from Summit Medical Center (Exhibit 2). On cross-examination, Mr. Griffis testified that he teaches and practices martial arts twice per week. On re-direct, he explained that back injuries are very rare with the type of martial arts he practices, Tae Kwon Do, as compared to the frequency of lower body and in particular leg mjunes. 2
4 Mr. Martin testified that he handles workers' compensation matters for Five Star. He stated that Mr. Griffis did not indicate a cause for the condition he alleges is work-related. On cross-examination, Mr. Martin acknowledged receipt of a copy of the After Care Instructions (Exhibit 4). Employee's Contentions Mr. Griffis contends he injured his back at some point on August 21, He is an honest, hard-working employee who simply wants to be made whole from bills he received relative to a work injury. The type of injury he sustained is consistent with the type of duties he performs and the physical nature of his job. Mr. Griffis seeks an order that Five Star and/or its Carrier pay both medical bills from the emergency room visit. Employer's Contentions Five Star contends the injury is not work-related. Five Star provided authorized care until obtaining the emergency room records and discovering that the etiology of Mr. Griffis' condition is unknown and it is thus not work-related. Mr. Griffis failed to satisfy his burden to show that the medical evidence establishes causation and preponderates in his favor. As a result, the injury did not arise primarily out of and in the course and scope of employment. Therefore, Five Star properly denied the claim and declined to pay for unauthorized treatment. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Standard Applied When determining whether to award benefits, the Judge must decide whether the moving party is likely to succeed on the merits at trial given the information available. See generally, McCall v. Nat'! Health Care Corp., 100 S.W. 3d 209, 214 (Tenn. 2003). In a workers' compensation action, pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section (c)(6) (2014), the employee shall bear the burden of proving each and every element of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. The employee must show the injury arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of employment. Tenn. Code Ann (13) (2014). Factual Findings On August 21, 2014, Mr. Griffis experienced chest and back pain. He does not know what specifically happened to cause his pain that day. Mr. Griffis performs job duties that are physically demanding. He sought medical treatment on his own at Summit Medical Center, for what he believed to be heart attack symptoms. Mr. Griffis received two bills from the ER visit, in the amounts of $ and $1, The Summit Medical Center bill (Exhibit 2) indicates that the charges are related to heart attack-type treatment. Upon his discharge, Mr. Griffis received After Care Instructions that state that the cause of his pain is unknown. Mr. Griffis received authorized care from Concentra on August 22 through 29, Dr. Dutton diagnosed thoracic strain and placed Mr. Griffis at MMI on August 29, The 3
5 Concentra records do not state that the injury is work-related. Five Star denied the claim and declined to pay for unauthorized care. Application of Law to Facts The issue in this case is whether Mr. Griffis presented sufficient evidence to prove he suffered a compensable injury. Tennessee Code Annotated Section (13) provides as follows: "Injury" or "personal injury" mean an injury by accident..., provided, that: (A) An injury is "accidental" only if the injury is caused by a specific incident, or set of incidents, arising primarily out of and in the course and scope of employment, and is identifiable by time and place of occurrence... ; (B) An injury "arises primarily out of and in the course and scope of employment" only if it has been shown by a preponderance of the evidence that the employment contributed more than fifty percent (50%) in causing the injury, considering all causes; (C) An injury causes death, disablement or the need for medical treatment only if it has been shown to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that it contributed more than fifty percent (50%) in causing death, disablement or need for medical treatment, considering all causes. Tenn. Code Ann (13)(A)-(C) (2014). In Tindall v. Waring Park Ass'n, 725 S.W.2d 935, (Tenn. 1987), the Tennessee Supreme Court defined the causal connection required before an injury will be held compensable under the workers' compensation law. The Court opined that causal connection refers to cause in the sense that the accident had its origin in the hazards to which the employment exposed the employee while doing his work.!d. at 937. The mere presence at the place of injury because of the employment will not result in the injury being considered as arising out of the employment. Thornton v. RCA Serv. Co., 221 S.W.2d 954, 955 (Tenn. 1949). In all but the most simple and obvious of cases, an employee must prove causation of his injury by expert medical proof. Orman v. Williams Sonoma, Inc., 803 S.W.2d 672, 676 (Tenn. 1991). In this case, Mr. Griffis did not describe a specific incident or set of incidents that took place at work to cause his injury, other than to describe the physical nature of his job - pushing, pulling, and carrying heavy objects, sometimes up and down stairs -- and his daily, earnest attempts to perform at his best. He did not describe with any specificity what he lifted; what time it happened, other than the day; or if other workers observed his injury. The statute requires an employee to specify the incident or series of incidents that cause an injury, but Mr. Griffis failed to do so. Further, the After Care Instructions from Summit Medical Center do not state that the injury is work-related. Rather, they state that the cause of his pain is unknown. 4
6 The Court finds Mr. Griffis to be a credible witness. He gave the Court no reason to doubt that he discussed the etiology of his symptoms with Dr. McKean, who perhaps verbally conveyed an opinion or impression that the injury is work-related. However, the written evidence does not support the conclusion that it is, in fact, her opinion to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that it is more than fifty percent (50%) likely that the injury arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of his employment. Likewise, the Concentra records lack any notation that the injury is work-related. The only evidence for this Court regarding causation is Mr. Griffis' testimony of his lay opinion. This is not a simple and obvious case that would preclude the need for expert medical proof. Thus, he has not satisfied his burden under the McCall standard that his injury arose primarily out of and in the course and scope of employment. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows: 1. Mr. Griffis' claim against Five Star and its workers' compensation carrier for the requested medical benefits is denied on the grounds of compensability. This is not a final order. 2. This matter is set for Initial Hearing on March 5, 2015, at 9:00a.m. ENTERED this the 6 1 h day of February, C ief Judge Ketme Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims Initial Hearing: An Initial Hearing has been set with Chief Judge Kenneth M. Switzer, Court of Workers Compensation. You must dial in at or toll free at to participate in your scheduled conference. Please Note: You must call in on the scheduled date/time to participate. Failure to call in may result in a determination of the issues without your further participation. All conferences are set using Central Time (CT). Right to Appeal: Tennessee Law allows any party who disagrees with this Expedited Hearing Order to appeal the decision to the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board. To file a Notice of Appeal, you must: I. Complete the enclosed form entitled: "Expedited Hearing Notice of Appeal". 5
7 2. File the completed form with the Court Clerk within seven (7) business days of the date the Expedited Hearing Order was entered by the Workers' Compensation Judge. 3. Serve a copy of the Expedited Hearing Notice of Appeal upon the opposing party. 4. The parties, having the responsibility of ensuring a complete record on appeal, may request from the Court Clerk the audio recording of the hearing for the purpose of having a transcript prepared by a licensed court reporter and filing it with the Court Clerk within ten (10) calendar days of the filing of the Expedited Hearing Notice of Appeal. Alternatively, the parties may file a statement of the evidence within ten (10) calendar days of the filing of the Expedited Hearing Notice of Appeal. The statement of the evidence must be approved by the Judge before the record is submitted to the Clerk of the Appeals Board. 5. If the appellant elects to file a position statement in support of the interlocutory appeal, the appealing party shall file such position statement with the Court Clerk within three (3) business days of the filing of the Expedited Hearing Notice of Appeal, specifying the issues presented for review and including any argument in support thereof. If the appellee elects to file a response in opposition to the interlocutory appeal, appellee shall do so within three (3) business days of the filing of the appellant's position statement. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the Expedited Hearing Order Denying Medical Benefits was sent to the following recipients by the following methods of service on this the 6th day offebruary, Name Certified First Via Fax Via Address Mail Class Fax Number Mail Carol Griffis, X Mastergriffis597 (a)yahoo.com Employee Michael Jones, X Mjones(ti)wimberlylawson.com Employer/Carrier' s attorney Clerk, Court of Workers' Compensation Claims 6
McQuiddy, Jana v. Saint Thomas Hospital
University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims and Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Law 6-28-2016 McQuiddy, Jana v.
Scott, Jr., Raymond W. v. Snyder Services Plumbing Company
University of Tennessee, Knoxville Trace: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims and Workers' Compensation Appeals Board Law 10-1-2015 Scott, Jr., Raymond
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. G204754. JENNIFER WILLIAMS, Employee. MERCY HOSPITAL FORT SMITH, Employer
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. G204754 JENNIFER WILLIAMS, Employee MERCY HOSPITAL FORT SMITH, Employer SISTERS OF MERCY HEALTH SYSTEM, Carrier CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F311984. CHARLES MARTIN, Employee. VAN BUREN PIPE CORPORATION, Employer
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F311984 CHARLES MARTIN, Employee VAN BUREN PIPE CORPORATION, Employer CONSTITUTION STATE SERVICE COMPANY, Carrier CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F301230. SAMUEL BEATTY, Employee. USA TRUCK, INC., Self-Insured Employer
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F301230 SAMUEL BEATTY, Employee USA TRUCK, INC., Self-Insured Employer CLAIMANT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED AUGUST 1, 2003 Hearing before ADMINISTRATIVE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE February 23, 2009 Session
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE February 23, 2009 Session DON R. DILLEHAY v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION BERNICE M. KAYS ) Claimant ) VS. ) ) Docket No. 1,051,695 PROSOCO, INC. ) Respondent ) AND ) ) INSURANCE COMPANY OF STATE OF ) PENNSYLVANIA
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F401605. CAROL LUELLEN, Employee. WAL-MART STORES, Employer
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F401605 CAROL LUELLEN, Employee WAL-MART STORES, Employer CLAIMS MANAGEMENT, INC., Carrier CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED JULY
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION QUANITA A. PEOPLES ) Claimant ) VS. ) ) Docket No. 1,045,122 LANGLEY/EMPIRE CANDLE COMPANY ) Respondent ) AND ) ) SECURA INSURANCE,
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL KNOXVILLE, MAY 1999 SESSION
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL KNOXVILLE, MAY 1999 SESSION FILED August 27, 1999 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate Court Clerk ROBERT JONES CUMBERLAND CIRCUIT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL KNOXVILLE, MARCH 1996 SESSION
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL KNOXVILLE, MARCH 1996 SESSION FILED BILLY CLEVINGER, ) July 10, 1996 Plaintiff-Appellant, ) Hawkins County Cecil Crowson, Jr.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE October 25, 2010 Session
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE October 25, 2010 Session ROBIN BAKER v. A & L INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE, INC. Appeal from the Chancery
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION WAYNE M. McKIBBEN Claimant VS. DRY BASEMENT & FOUNDATION SYSTEMS Respondent Docket No. 1,034,394 AND ACCIDENT FUND INSURANCE CO.
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G100239 JANNETTE HALL, EMPLOYEE PINE BLUFF SCHOOL DISTRICT, EMPLOYER
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G100239 JANNETTE HALL, EMPLOYEE PINE BLUFF SCHOOL DISTRICT, EMPLOYER ARKANSAS SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION, INSURANCE CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT
COMPENSATION ORDER TIMOTHY BURROUGHS, ) Claimant, ) ) AHD No. 06-094 v. ) OWC No. 597835 J & J MAINTENANCE, INC., ) and ) AIG CLAIMS SERVICES, )
IN THE MATTER OF, TIMOTHY BURROUGHS, Claimant, AHD No. 06-094 v. OWC No. 597835 J & J MAINTENANCE, INC., and AIG CLAIMS SERVICES, Employer/Carrier. Appearances REBEKAH ARCH MILLER, ESQUIRE For the Claimant
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION GEORGIA R. KATZ ) Claimant ) VS. ) ) Docket No. 1,068,293 USD 229 ) Self-Insured Respondent ) ORDER STATEMENT OF THE CASE Claimant
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F910691. TERRY FOSTER, Employee. TYSON SALES & DISTRIBUTION, Self-Insured Employer
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. F910691 TERRY FOSTER, Employee TYSON SALES & DISTRIBUTION, Self-Insured Employer CLAIMANT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED NOVEMBER 20, 2013 Hearing
Illinois Official Reports
Illinois Official Reports Appellate Court Continental Tire of the Americas, LLC v. Illinois Workers Compensation Comm n, 2015 IL App (5th) 140445WC Appellate Court Caption CONTINENTAL TIRE OF THE AMERICAS,
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION TRISTA RAULS ) Claimant ) VS. ) ) PREFERRED RISK INSURANCE SERVICES ) Docket Nos. 1,061,187 Respondent ) & 1,061,188 AND ) ) HANOVER
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL. AT KNOXVILLE (August 5, 1996 Session)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT KNOXVILLE (August 5, 1996 Session FILED January 27, 1997 RONALD L. SHOOK, KNOX CIRCUIT Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate Court
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT JACKSON June 30, 2000 Session
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT JACKSON June 30, 2000 Session RONNIE WAYNE INMAN v. EMERSON ELECTRIC CO. Direct Appeal from the Chancery Court (Humboldt)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT JACKSON March 26, 2012 Session
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT JACKSON March 26, 2012 Session GAIL FLY v. TRAVELERS INSURANCE ET AL. Appeal from the Chancery Court for Gibson County No.
United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER
United States Department of Labor W.T., Appellant and U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, Birmingham, AL, Employer Appearances: Appellant, pro se Office of Solicitor, for the Director Docket No. 12-1743
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE KATHY GEORGE v. CARRIER CORPORATION, et. al. Direct Appeal from the Cannon County Circuit Court No. 3170, Robert
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION KIMBERLY OWEN ) Claimant ) VS. ) ) Docket No. 1,050,199 MARKIN GROUP ) Respondent ) AND ) ) STATE FARM FIRE & CASUALTY COMPANY )
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS
STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS PROVIDENCE, SC. WORKERS COMPENSATION COURT APPELLATE DIVISION ROBERT BUELL ) ) VS. ) W.C.C. 03-00724 ) COCA-COLA ENTERPRISES ) DECISION OF THE APPELLATE
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2013-WC-02083-COA HOWARD INDUSTRIES INC. MISSISSIPPI WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALED:
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2013-WC-02083-COA ELSA PEREZ APPELLANT v. HOWARD INDUSTRIES INC. APPELLEE DATE OF JUDGMENT: 11/27/2013 TRIBUNAL FROM WHICH MISSISSIPPI WORKERS COMPENSATION
CCASE: SOL (MSHA) V. CONSOLIDATION COAL DDATE: 19880630 TTEXT:
CCASE: SOL (MSHA) V. CONSOLIDATION COAL DDATE: 19880630 TTEXT: ~874 Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission (F.M.S.H.R.C.) Office of Administrative Law Judges SECRETARY OF LABOR, CIVIL PENALTY
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE November 28, 2011 Session
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE November 28, 2011 Session ROCHELLE M. EVANS v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY Appeal from the Chancery Court for Davidson County
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G103629 SHIKITA WRIGHT, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED JULY 10, 2013
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G103629 SHIKITA WRIGHT, EMPLOYEE ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, EMPLOYER PUBLIC EMPLOYEE CLAIMS DIVISION, INSURANCE CARRIER CLAIMANT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT JACKSON June 30, 2000 Session
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT JACKSON June 30, 2000 Session LUKE KEELING v. FLORIDA STEEL, now known as AMERISTEEL Direct Appeal from the Chancery Court
2016 IL App (2d) 141240WC-U FILED: NO. 2-14-1240WC IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS SECOND DISTRICT WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION DIVISION
NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e(1. 2016 IL App (2d 141240WC-U FILED:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL. AT NASHVILLE (March 14, 1996 Session)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT NASHVILLE (March 14, 1996 Session) FILED July 24, 1996 VICKIE WINNINGHAM, ) Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate Court Clerk PUTNAM
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE December 7, 2009 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE December 7, 2009 Session SHERRI J. HAGER, et al., v. RAMSEY G. LARSON, M.D., et al. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hamblen County No. 06CV160 Hon. John
S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N WORKERS COMPENSATION APPELLATE COMMISSION V DOCKET #96-0235
JEFFREY P. GUERRIERO, PLAINTIFF, 1998 OPINION #301 S T A T E O F M I C H I G A N WORKERS COMPENSATION APPELLATE COMMISSION V DOCKET #96-0235 CENTURY MACHINE INC AND SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANTS.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT KNOXVILLE October 25, 2010 Session
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT KNOXVILLE October 25, 2010 Session ANNE MARIE SMITH v. INTEX ENTERPRISES, LLC Appeal from the Circuit Court for Anderson
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. G204960 LASHAREN MARTIN, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED JANUARY 27, 2014
BEFORE THE RKNSS WORKERS' COMPENSTION COMMISSION WCC NO. G204960 LSHREN MRTIN, EMPLOYEE COPELNDS TEXRKN. LLC, EMPLOYER MRKEL INSURNCE CO./ FIRSTCOMP UNDERWRITER S GROUP INSURNCE CRRIER/TP CLIMNT RESPONDENT
General Information on Representing Yourself in a Workers Compensation Case
General Information on Representing Yourself in a Workers Compensation Case Idaho Industrial Commission PO Box 83720 Boise, ID 83720-0041 Telephone: (208) 334-6000 Fax: (208) 332-7558 www.iic.idaho.gov
United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER
United States Department of Labor B.P., Appellant and DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, Baltimore, MD, Employer Docket No. 13-1726 Issued: January 30, 2014 Appearances: Appellant,
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION MARION A. DAVIS ) Claimant ) VS. ) ) Docket No. 216,570 CONSPEC MARKETING & MANUFACTURING CO. ) Respondent ) AND ) ) UNITED STATES
IN THE NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT ON APPEAL
IN THE NEBRASKA COURT OF APPEALS MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT ON APPEAL SARAVIA V. HORMEL FOODS NOTICE: THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PERMANENT PUBLICATION AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS PROVIDED
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE September 19, 2011 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE September 19, 2011 Session JOSHUA N. LEE, v. LYONS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Sevier County No. 2009-0263-11 Hon. Richard
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT KNOXVILLE December 14, 2000 Session
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT KNOXVILLE December 14, 2000 Session PHILIPS CONSUMER ELECTRONICS COMPANY v. KATHY A. JENNINGS Direct Appeal from the Circuit
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS
M.R. 3140 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS Order entered February 16, 2011. (Deleted material is struck through and new material is underscored.) Effective immediately, Supreme Court Rules
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT JACKSON June 24, 2013 Session
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE SPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL AT JACKSON June 24, 2013 Session JESSIE UPCHURCH v. GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY Appeal from the Chancery Court for Obion
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Mark A. Rice and Cindy L. Rice, : husband and wife, : Petitioners : : No. 1652 C.D. 2012 v. : Submitted: January 11, 2013 : Workers Compensation Appeal : Board
COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO.2010-CA-01424-COA MCCOMB NURSING AND REHABILITATION CENTER, LLC VS. MASUMI LEE, INDIVIDUALLY, AND AS ON BEHALF OF THE WRONGFUL DEATH BENEFICIARIES OF ROBERT
Employees Compensation Appeals Board
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR Employees Compensation Appeals Board In the Matter of MARTHELL T. ADAMS and DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, CIVILIAN PERSONNEL OFFICE, New Orleans, La. Docket No. 96-1140; Submitted on
United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER
United States Department of Labor M.S., Appellant and U.S. POSTAL SERVICE, POST OFFICE, Denver, CO, Employer Appearances: Appellant, pro se Office of Solicitor, for the Director Docket No. 13-1614 Issued:
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F102457 OPINION FILED JULY 20, 2004
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F102457 KEN WATERS, EMPLOYEE CENTURY TUBE CORPORATION, EMPLOYER CROCKETT ADJUSTMENT, CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED
United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER
United States Department of Labor L.K., Appellant and DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, PHILADELPHIA TERMINAL MARKET, Philadelphia, PA, Employer Appearances: Appellant, pro se Office of Solicitor, for the Director
NO. COA08-1063 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 16 June 2009
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3)
United States Department of Labor Employees Compensation Appeals Board DECISION AND ORDER
United States Department of Labor T.M., Appellant and DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, IMMIGRATION & CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, New York, NY, Employer Appearances: Thomas S. Harkins, Esq., for the appellant
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2013-CA-01200-COA
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2013-CA-01200-COA HARVEY HALEY APPELLANT v. ANNA JURGENSON, AGELESS REMEDIES FRANCHISING, LLC, AGELESS REMEDIES MEDICAL SKINCARE AND APOTHECARY AND
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F008194 EMMA YOUNG, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED DECEMBER 30, 2004
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. F008194 EMMA YOUNG, EMPLOYEE INTERNATIONAL WIRE GROUP, INC., EMPLOYER ONEBEACON INSURANCE COMPANY, INSURANCE CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs November 04, 2014
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON Assigned on Briefs November 04, 2014 WILLIAM NEWSON v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Appeal from the Circuit Court for Madison County No. C13358 Roy B. Morgan,
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON. TALMAGE CRUMP v. KIMBERLY BELL
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON TALMAGE CRUMP v. KIMBERLY BELL A Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Shelby County No. 85116-6 The Honorable George H. Brown, Jr., Judge No. W1999-00673-COA-R3-CV
APPEAL OF NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (New Hampshire Compensation Appeals Board)
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter, Supreme
STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
[Cite as Uhl v. McKoski, 2014-Ohio-479.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SUMMIT ) VICKIE L. UHL C.A. No. 27066 Appellant v. JOHN MCKOSKI, et al. Appellees
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G006420 HOUMPHAENG DAOSAENG, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT OK FOODS, INC., SELF-INSURED EMPLOYER
BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G006420 HOUMPHAENG DAOSAENG, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT OK FOODS, INC., SELF-INSURED EMPLOYER RESPONDENT OPINION FILED NOVEMBER 12, 2015 Hearing before
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION
BEFORE THE APPEALS BOARD FOR THE KANSAS DIVISION OF WORKERS COMPENSATION DALE L. STILWELL ) Claimant ) VS. ) ) BOEING COMPANY and ) Docket Nos. 253,800 CESSNA AIRCRAFT COMPANY ) & 1,031,180 Respondents
