TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION 

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD 

Katherine Perrault 

v. 

Gem Care, Inc. 

Appeal from the Court of Workers' 

Compensation Claims 

Brian K. Addington, Judge 

) Docket No. 2015-02-0210 

) 

) 

) State File No. 51173-2015 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Affirmed and Remanded -November 12, 2015 

FILED 

November 12, 2015 

TENNESSEE 

WORKERS' COMPENSATION 

APPEALS BOARD 

Time: 10:11 AM 

In this interlocutory appeal, the employee alleges she developed a hiatal hernia, 

hemorrhoids, and acute appendicitis as a result of an incident of heavy lifting at work. 

The employer denied her claim, asserting there was no evidence that her alleged medical 

conditions arose primarily from the reported episode of heavy lifting at work. Following 

an expedited hearing, the trial court declined to order temporary disability or medical 

benefits, concluding that the employee had not met her burden of showing that she is 

likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits. Having carefully reviewed the record, we 

affirm and remand the case for further proceedings as may be necessary. 

Judge Timothy W. Conner delivered the opinion of the Appeals Board, in which Judge 

Marshall L. Davidson, III, and Judge David F. Hensley joined. 

William F. Evans, Clinton, Tennessee, for the employee-appellant, Katherine Perrault 

Joseph Lynch, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the employer-appellee, Gem Care, Inc. 

1 
Factual and Procedural Background 

The employee, Katherine Perrault ("Employee"), a forty-six-year-old resident of 

Jefferson County, Tennessee, was employed by Gem Care, Inc. ("Employer"), a staffing 

agency. On May 4, 2015, Employee was assigned to work at Timken, a manufacturing 

facility, as an unloader and press operator. On Monday, June 8, 2015, while lifting a 

metal cast onto a machine, she felt pain under her breastbone as well as an urgent need to 

use the restroom. Employee testified that following the incident, which occurred 

approximately one hour after her shift started, she experienced multiple episodes of rectal 

bleeding throughout her shift. She was able to complete her shift that day but sought 

assistance from co-workers when heavy lifting was required. 

Employee did not report this incident to her supervisor or the on-site Gem Care 

representative, Iris Jordan, on the day of its occurrence. The following day, she called 

and texted Ms. Jordan to inform her that she was going to an emergency room due to 

rectal bleeding and vomiting and that she would not be at work that day. Employee 

acknowledged that she did not tell Ms. Jordan she believed this to be a work-related 

condition at that time. The plant was closed Wednesday through Friday that week. 

Employee alleged that she reported her condition as a work-related injury on 

Monday, June 15, 2015, during a telephone conversation with Ms. Jordan, who admitted 

that Employee alleged she was told by her physician that "it was because of lifting heavy 

weights." Ms. Jordan also acknowledged that, as a result of the June 15 telephone 

conversation with Employee, she completed a work accident report. No panel of 

physicians was provided to Employee. 

When Employee reported to the emergency room the day after the alleged 

incident, she was evaluated by Dr. Jill Robinson. Dr. Robinson noted a history of rectal 

bleeding "off and on x 1 year" and "solid problems with the bleeding for the past 5 days." 

During her testimony, Employee denied or did not recall making these statements. In a 

consultation report completed by Dr. Linas Adams, he noted, "[s]he apparently has been 

passing this blood on and off now for well over a year according to her husband and 

herself .... " Both Employee and her husband denied making these statements to Dr. 

Adams. 

Employee was hospitalized for two days immediately after the alleged work 

incident. Due to a family history of colon cancer, Employee was unsure of the cause of 

her rectal bleeding during her hospitalization. However, after a conversation with Dr. 

Adams, she came to believe her condition was a work-related injury due to the pain and 

symptoms she experienced after lifting the metal cast on June 8. Employer did not 

authorize any medical treatment or pay any workers' compensation benefits. Employee 

did not return to work for Employer. 

2 
Thereafter, Employee filed a Petition for Benefit Determination seeking temporary 

disability and medical benefits. Following unsuccessful mediation efforts, a Dispute 

Certification Notice was issued listing compensability, medical benefits, and temporary 

disability benefits as disputed issues. Employee then filed a Request for Expedited 

Hearing, with an affidavit, which sought a decision from the trial court without an 

evidentiary hearing. Although the record is silent on this issue, the trial judge apparently 

determined that the case merited an in-person evidentiary hearing, as one was conducted 

on September 18, 20 15. The trial court then issued an Expedited Hearing Order Denying 

Requested Benefits, concluding that Employee "has not come forward with sufficient 

evidence at this time from which the Court can determine she is likely to succeed at a 

hearing on the merits." Employee appealed, and the record was received by the Clerk of 

the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board on November 4, 2015. 

Standard of Review 

The standard of review to be applied by the Appeals Board in reviewing a trial 

court's decision is statutorily mandated and limited in scope. Specifically, "[t]here shall 

be a presumption that the findings and conclusions of the workers' compensation judge 

are correct, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise." Tenn. Code Ann. § 

50-6-239(c)(7) (2014). The trial court's decision must be upheld unless the rights of a 

party "have been prejudiced because findings, inferences, conclusions, or decisions of a 

workers' compensation judge: 

(A) Violate constitutional or statutory provisions; 

(B) Exceed the statutory authority of the workers' compensation judge; 

(C) Do not comply with lawful procedure; 

(D) Are arbitrary, capricious, characterized by abuse of discretion, or 

clearly an unwarranted exercise of discretion; 

(E) Are not supported by evidence that is both substantial and material 

in the light of the entire record." 

Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-217(a)(3) (2015). Like other courts applying the standards 

embodied in section 50-6-217(a)(3), we will not disturb the decision of the trial court 

absent the limited circumstances identified in the statute. 

Analysis 

At an expedited hearing, an employee need not prove every element of his or her 

claim by a preponderance of the evidence, but must come forward with sufficient 

evidence from which the trial court can determine that the employee is likely to prevail at 

a hearing on the merits, consistent with Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-

239(d)(l) (2014). McCord v. Advantage Human Resourcing, No. 2014-06-0063, 2015 

TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 6, at *9 (Tenn. Workers' Comp. App. Bd. Mar. 27, 

3 
20 15). This lesser evidentiary standard "does not relieve an employee of the burden of 

producing evidence of an injury by accident that arose primarily out of and in the course 

and scope of employment at an expedited hearing, but allows some relief to be granted if 

that evidence does not rise to the level of a 'preponderance of the evidence.'" Buchanan 

v. Car/ex Glass Co., No. 2015-01-0012, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 39, at *6 

(Tenn. Workers' Comp. App. Bd. Sept. 29, 2015). 

In cases involving an alleged hernia, a trial court must also consider the 

requirements of Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-212(a) (2014). That section 

expressly applies "in all claims for compensation for hernia or rupture" and includes five 

elements, which "must be definitely proven to the satisfaction of the court:" 

( 1) There was an injury resulting in hernia or rupture; 

(2) The hernia or rupture appeared suddenly; 

(3) It was accompanied by pain; 

( 4) The hernia or rupture immediately followed the accident; and 

(5) The hernia or rupture did not exist prior to the accident for which 

compensation is claimed. 

Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-212(a) (2014). Moreover, unlike hernia claims which arose 

prior to July 1, 2014, the hernia must arise ''primarily out of and in the course and scope 

ofthe employee's employment." ld. (emphasis added). 

In the present case, Employee has alleged three distinct medical conditions which 

she contends are related to the lifting incident at work on June 8, 2015: a hiatal hernia, 

hemorrhoids, and appendicitis. With respect to the hemorrhoids and appendicitis, 

Employee had the burden at the expedited hearing to come forward with sufficient 

evidence that she is likely to prove at a hearing on the merits that those conditions arose 

primarily from the lifting incident at work. With respect to the hiatal hernia, Employee 

also had to come forward with sufficient evidence that she is likely to prove the five 

elements mandated by section 50-6-212. 

In its expedited hearing order, the trial court concluded that Employee's testimony 

"is insufficient to establish she suffered a work-related injury." In so holding, the trial 

court emphasized several inconsistencies between Employee's testimony and the 

recorded histories as reflected in the medical records, concluding that "[t]he variations in 

the extent and length of her prior medical conditions and any possible connection to her 

present alleged injury are too significant to ignore." Such determinations of witness 

credibility are entitled to deference on appeal. Townsend v. State, 826 S.W.2d 434, 437 

(Tenn. 1992); Durant v. Saturn Corp., No. M2003-00566-WC-R3-CV, 2004 Tenn. 

LEXIS 353, at *9 (Tenn. Workers' Comp. Panel Apr. 30, 2004). We conclude from our 

review of the record that the evidence does not preponderate against this finding. 

4 
Moreover, with respect to the alleged hiatal hernia, Employee presented no 

testimony or other evidence indicating that the hiatal hernia "appeared suddenly" or that 

it "immediately followed the accident" as required by Tennessee Code Annotated section 

50-6-212(a). This lack of evidence supports the trial court's conclusion that Employee 

failed to meet the standard of proof required at an expedited hearing. 

As we have explained previously: 

[M]ere notice of an alleged workplace accident, in and of itself, does not 

trigger an employer's duty to provide medical benefits in every case, 

without regard to the particular circumstances presented. If an employer 

chooses to deny the claim following its initial investigation, the employee 

must come forward with sufficient evidence from which the trial court can 

determine that the employee likely will prove a compensable "injury by 

accident" at a hearing on the merits in accordance with section 50-6-

239(d)(l). 

McCord, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 6, at *13. Based on our review of the 

record in this case, we cannot conclude that the evidence preponderates against the trial 

court's determination. 

Conclusion 

The trial court's expedited hearing order denying medical and/or temporary 

disability benefits is affirmed. This case is remanded to the trial court for any further 

proceedings as may be necessary. 

5 

. Conner, Judge 

Compensation Appeals Board 
 

 

 TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION 

 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD 

Katherine Perrault ) Docket No. 2015-02-0210

)

v. )

) State File No. 51173-2015

Gem Care, Inc. ) 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the Appeals Board’s decision in the 

referenced case was sent to the following recipients by the following methods of service 

on this the 12th day of November, 2015. 

Name Certified 

Mail 

First Class 

Mail 

Via 

Fax 

Fax 

Number 

Via 

Email 

Email Address 

William Evans X williamevansesq@gmail.com 

Joe Lynch X jlynch@wimberlylawson.com 

Brian Addington X Via Electronic Mail

Kenneth M. Switzer, 

Chief Judge

 X Via Electronic Mail

Penny Shrum, Clerk, 

Court of Workers’ 

Compensation Claims

 X Penny.Patterson-Shrum@tn.gov

 

Jeanette Baird

Deputy Clerk, Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board

220 French Landing Dr., Ste. 1-B 

Nashville, TN 37243 

Telephone: 615-253-0064 

Electronic Mail: Jeanette.Baird@tn.gov