TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS

IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS

AT NASHVILLE

JULIE LAWSON, )

)

Docket No. 2024-60-0333

Employee, )

)

v. )

COSTAR GROUP, INC., COSTAR 

REALTY INFORMATION, INC.

Employer,

BERKLEY NATIONAL INS. CO.,

 Carrier.

)

)

)

)

)

State File No. 26221-2023

Judge Joshua Davis Baker

COMPENSATION ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT

On September 17, the Court heard CoStar’s Motion for Summary Judgment. CoStar 

argued Ms. Lawson’s evidence is insufficient to establish an essential element of her 

mental-injury claim and summary judgment is appropriate. For the reasons below, the 

Court grants summary judgment to CoStar and dismisses this claim with prejudice. 1

Claim History

Ms. Lawson has pre-existing post-traumatic stress disorder and alleged the 

circumstances of a work evaluation on February 28, 2023, exacerbated her mental 

condition. CoStar filed a statement of undisputed material facts to which Ms. Lawson 

responded. The following facts are not disputed: 

During a meeting that morning, a colleague inadvertently used the word 

“kidnapped.” Although the word was not directed to or about Ms. Lawson, it reminded her 

of a past traumatic event from 2002.

1 This decision renders Ms. Lawson’s “Objection and Motion to Compel Employer to Produce Audio” and 

“Open Letter to the Court” moot. 

FILED

Oct 01, 2024

07:00 AM(CT)

TENNESSEE COURT OF

WORKERS' COMPENSATION

CLAIMS
A couple of hours later, Ms. Lawson received her annual evaluation results from 

two male supervisors, Colton Frame and Michael Upchurch, who met with her to discuss 

them.

However, Mr. Frame and Mr. Upchurch had permitted another supervisor, Fred 

Bidel, to write the evaluation, even though Mr. Bidel was under a Human Resources 

investigation for his alleged misconduct toward Ms. Lawson during the timeframe covered 

by her evaluation. 

While Ms. Lawson agreed with the above statements of undisputed material facts, 

she responded that several other statements were wrong, inaccurate, or incomplete. She 

offered the following response, from her previously filed affidavit, as an accurate 

accounting of what caused her injury:

She further explained in her affidavit that “[w]hat Mr. Frame, Mr. Upchurch, and 

Mr. Bidel did, in essence, overwhelmingly recreated parts of a personal traumatic event 

from 2002 that had been brought to mind that very morning when a colleague randomly 

used the word ‘kidnapped’ in a team meeting.” 

Law and Analysis 

Before addressing the motion’s merits, the Court first considers this claim’s 

procedural posture and CoStar’s compliance with applicable rules. 

The Court should not entertain a motion for summary judgment until a scheduling 

order is entered. Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. 0800-02-21-.18(1)(b) (December 2023). Here, a 
scheduling order was entered and later suspended. However, the scheduling order’s 

suspension did not impede discovery or otherwise affect Ms. Lawson’s ability to respond 

to summary judgment. 

Additionally, CoStar allowed sufficient response time and sent Ms. Lawson a copy 

of applicable rules, complying with both Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 56.04 and 

Rules 0800-02-21-.18(1)(a) and (c) of the Tennessee Compilation Rules and Regulations.

Therefore, this claim is procedurally ripe for summary judgment. 

 

Turning to the merits, summary judgment is appropriate when “the pleadings, 

depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, 

if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party 

is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” Tenn. R. Civ. P. 56.04 (2023). 

To prevail, CoStar must do one of two things: (1) submit affirmative evidence that 

negates an essential element of Ms. Lawson’s claim, or (2) demonstrate that her evidence

is insufficient to establish an essential element of her claim. Tenn. Code Ann. § 20-16-101 

(2024); see also Rye v. Women's Care Ctr. of Memphis, MPLLC, 477 S.W.3d 235, 264

(Tenn. 2015). 

When viewing the material facts in a light favorable to Ms. Lawson, the Court finds 

that CoStar has demonstrated her evidence is insufficient to establish an essential element 

of her claim: that the work event resulted in a stimulus that would constitute a viable claim

for a mental injury.

Under Workers’ Compensation Law, a mental injury that is not accompanied by a 

physical injury must arise primarily out of “an identifiable work related event resulting in 

a sudden or unusual stimulus, and shall not include a psychological or psychiatric response 

due to the loss of employment or employment opportunities.” Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-

102(15). 

Tennessee courts apply a two-part test to determine if an injury caused by mental or 

emotional stimulus is compensable. First, the injury must stem from “an identifiable 

stressful, work-related event producing a sudden mental stimulus such as fright, shock, or 

excessive unexpected anxiety.” Second, “the event must be extraordinary in comparison to 

the stress ordinarily experienced by an employee in the same type of duty.” Edwards v.

Fred’s Pharmacy, 2018 TN Work. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 9, at *7 (Feb. 14, 2018).

The parties do not dispute the material facts—only how the law applies to them. Ms. 

Lawson argues an identifiable work event (the “evaluation-during-investigation”) resulted 

in a sudden or unusual stimulus for her. Her analysis requires using a subjective standard

that incorporates her pre-existing mental or psychological condition to explain how the 
stressful work event produced a sudden and unusual stimulus for her when it would not 

have for someone else. 

That subjective standard “is not the law in Tennessee.” Ireton v. Horizon Mental 

Health Mgmt., LLC, No. E2015-00296-SC-R3-WC, 2016 Tenn. LEXIS 3, at *28 (Tenn. 

Workers’ Comp. Panel Jan. 19, 2016). Rather, “our Supreme Court has mandated the 

application of an objective test for this determination.” An “objective standard is required

. . . even [when] medical experts have opined that the Employee suffered PTSD stemming 

out of the particular event or stress.” Id. at *28-29.

Notably, applying an objective standard “is not inconsistent with the principle under 

Tennessee law that an employer takes an employee as it finds him[,]” for the following 

reason: 

[I]t is only after the court first determines that an event or stress was 

abnormal, extraordinary, or unusual under the objective standard that the 

court then applies the principle that the employer takes the employee as it 

finds him to the determination of whether the abnormal, extraordinary, or 

unusual event or stress was, in fact, the medical/psychological cause of the 

employee’s injuries.” 

Id. at *30-31.

This “objective standard . . . is consistent with the Court’s recognition that the 

workers’ compensation system does not embrace every stress or strain of daily living or 

every undesirable experience encountered” during employment. Id. (citations omitted).

So, CoStar has shown that although Ms. Lawson has identified a work event, her 

claim is missing an essential element: “a sudden or unusual stimulus” under an objective 

standard that “shall not include a psychological or psychiatric response due to the loss of 

employment or employment opportunities.” Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-102(15). 

Ms. Lawson has not responded with facts to show the circumstances of her

evaluation would have produced a sudden or unusual stimulus such as fright, shock, or 

excessive unexpected anxiety in another employee. 

Certainly, permitting a supervisor who is under investigation for his conduct toward 

his supervisee to write her evaluation could produce unpleasant emotions like anger, 

powerlessness, or feelings of subjugation. But those feelings are not uncommon or 

unexpected in a workplace where supervisors must wield and exert authority even if the 

results seem unfair. Ms. Lawson acknowledged her physical safety was not harmed or 

threatened. Instead, the threat of harm and loss was to her employment and employment 

opportunities. 
Statutory law and caselaw direct that a mental injury does “not include a 

psychological or psychiatric response due to the loss of employment or employment 

opportunities.” Id. at subsection 102(15). A “concern over employment terms and 

conditions occurs in all types of occupations and is an inevitable concomitant of any 

contract of employment.” Cigna Property & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Sneed, 772 S.W.2d at 424

(Tenn. 1989). As the Tennessee Supreme Court wrote: 

If the employee in this case under these facts was entitled to recover benefits, 

then any employee who becomes anxious or depressed over an adverse 

employment decision or action, such as the possibility of losing a job; a poor 

evaluation; a transfer; a demotion; a layoff; and the like, would be able to 

recover benefits. Hence the rule that generalized fear or worry regarding job 

performance or job security does not rise to the level of a compensable injury. 

Goodloe v. State, 36 S.W.3d 62, 67 (Tenn. 2001)

CoStar has met its burden to show that Ms. Lawson is missing an essential element 

of her claim: an event that would produce a sudden and unusual stimulus for an ordinary

employee and that does not involve the threat of harm or loss to employment or 

employment opportunities. Because Ms. Lawson did not respond with facts showing a 

genuine issue for trial under Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 56.06, the Court finds 

summary judgment is appropriate and CoStar is entitled to summary judgment as a matter 

of law. 

IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. Ms. Lawson’s claim for workers’ compensation benefits is dismissed with prejudice 

to its refiling. 

2. Absent an appeal of this order, it shall become final thirty days after issuance.

3. The filing fee of $150.00 is taxed to CoStar under Tennessee Compilation Rules and 

Regulations 0800-02-21-.07, to be paid to the Court Clerk and for which execution 

might issue as necessary.

4. CoStar shall prepare and file the SD-2 with the Clerk within ten days of this order 

becoming final.

IT IS ORDERED.
ENTERED October ___, 2024.

______________________________________

Joshua Davis Baker, Judge

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of this Order was sent as indicated on October ___, 2024.

Name Certified 

Mail

Fax Email Service sent to:

Julie Lawson,

Employee

X julie.lawson0207@gmail.com

Allen Callison,

Employer’s Attorney

X allen.callison@mgclaw.com

______________________________________ 

Penny Shrum, Court Clerk 

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

wc.courtclerk@tn.gov 

1

1
For self-represented litigants: Help from an Ombudsman is available at 800-332-2667. 

Right to Appeal: 

If you disagree with the Court’s Order, you may appeal to the Workers’ Compensation 

Appeals Board. To do so, you must:

1. Complete the enclosed form entitled “Notice of Appeal” and file it with the Clerk of the 

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims before the expiration of the deadline. 

3⁄4 If the order being appealed is “expedited” (also called “interlocutory”), or if the 

order does not dispose of the case in its entirety, the notice of appeal must be filed 

within seven (7) business days of the date the order was filed. 

3⁄4 If the order being appealed is a “Compensation Order,” or if it resolves all issues 

in the case, the notice of appeal must be filed within thirty (30) calendar days of 

the date the Compensation Order was filed. 

When filing the Notice of Appeal, you must serve a copy on 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 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 of the 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 Indigency will result in dismissal of your appeal. 

3. You are responsible for ensuring a complete record is presented on appeal. If no court 

reporter was present at the hearing, you may request from the Court Clerk the audio 

recording of the hearing for a $25.00 fee. If you choose to submit a transcript as part of your 

appeal, which the Appeals Board has emphasized is important for a meaningful review of 

the case, a licensed court reporter must prepare the transcript, and you must file it with the 

Court Clerk. The Court Clerk will prepare the record for submission to the Appeals Board, 

and you will receive notice once it has been submitted. For deadlines related to the filing of 

transcripts, statements of the evidence, and briefs on appeal, see the applicable rules on the 

Bureau’s website at https://www.tn.gov/wcappealsboard. (Click the “Read Rules” button.) 

 

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. 

If neither party timely files an appeal with the Appeals Board, the Court Order 

becomes enforceable. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(3) (expedited/interlocutory 

orders) and Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(7) (compensation orders).
LB-1099 rev. 01/20 Page 1 of 2 RDA 11082 

NOTICE OF APPEAL 

Tennessee Bureau of Workers’ Compensation 

www.tn.gov/workforce/injuries-at-work/ 

wc.courtclerk@tn.gov | 1-800-332-2667 

Docket No.: ________________________

State File No.: ______________________ 

Date of Injury: _____________________ 

___________________________________________________________________________ 

Employee

v. 

___________________________________________________________________________ 

Employer

Notice is given that ____________________________________________________________________ 

[List name(s) of all appealing party(ies). Use separate sheet if necessary.]

appeals the following order(s) of the Tennessee Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims to the 

Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board;ĐŚĞĐŬŽŶĞŽƌŵŽƌĞĂƉƉůŝĐĂďůĞďŽdžĞƐĂŶĚŝŶĐůƵĚĞƚŚĞĚĂƚĞĨŝůĞͲ

ƐƚĂŵƉĞĚŽŶƚŚĞĨŝƌƐƚƉĂŐĞŽĨƚŚĞŽƌĚĞƌ;ƐͿďĞŝŶŐĂƉƉĞĂůĞĚͿ͗

□ Expedited Hearing Order filed on _______________ □ Motion Order filed on ___________________

□ Compensation Order filed on__________________ □ Other Order filed on_____________________

issued by Judge _________________________________________________________________________. 

Statement of the Issues on Appeal 

Provide a short and plain statement of the issues on appeal or basis for relief on appeal: 

________________________________________________________________________________________ 

________________________________________________________________________________________ 

________________________________________________________________________________________ 

________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Parties 

Appellant(s) (Requesting Party): _________________________________________ ܆Employer ܆Employee 

Address: ________________________________________________________ Phone: ___________________ 

Email: __________________________________________________________ 

Attorney’s Name: ______________________________________________ BPR#: _______________________ 

Attorney’s Email: ______________________________________________ Phone: _______________________ 

Attorney’s Address: _________________________________________________________________________ 

* Attach an additional sheet for each additional Appellant *
LB-1099 rev. 01/20 Page 2 of 2 RDA 11082 

Employee Name: _______________________________________ Docket No.: _____________________ Date of Inj.: _______________ 

Appellee(s) (Opposing Party): ___________________________________________ ܆Employer ܆Employee 

Appellee’s Address: ______________________________________________ Phone: ____________________ 

Email: _________________________________________________________ 

Attorney’s Name: _____________________________________________ BPR#: ________________________ 

Attorney’s Email: _____________________________________________ Phone: _______________________ 

Attorney’s Address: _________________________________________________________________________ 

* Attach an additional sheet for each additional Appellee *

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I, _____________________________________________________________, certify that I have forwarded a 

true and exact copy of this Notice of Appeal by First Class mail, postage prepaid, or in any manner as described 

in Tennessee Compilation Rules & Regulations, Chapter 0800-02-21, to all parties and/or their attorneys in this 

case on this the __________ day of ___________________________________, 20 ____. 

 ______________________________________________ 

[Signature of appellant or attorney for appellant]