COURT OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION CLAIMS 

DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION 

FILED 

April 15,2015 

TN COURT OF 

WORKERS' CO:\fPE~ SA TlOI\" 

CLAD IS 

Time: 8:27 A.\1 

EMPLOYEE: JAMES LAWSON 

EMPLOYER: MID-SOUTH TRANSPORT 

DOCKET#: 2014-02-0067 

STATE FILE#: 98697-2014 

DATE OF INJURY: 12/16/2014 

INSURANCE CARRIER: NATIONAL INTERSTATE INS. 

EXPEDITED HEAJUNG ORDER 

THIS CAUSE came before the undersigned Workers' Compensation Judge on March 30, 

2015, upon the Request for Expedited Hearing filed by Employee, James Lawson (Mr. Lawson), on 

February 25, 2015, pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-239 to determine if 

Employer, Mid-South Transport (Mid-South) is obligated to provide additional temporary disability 

benefits, and upon two Requests for Expedited Hearing filed by counsel for Mid-South to compel 

discovery. 

ANALYSIS 

Issues 

1. Whether Mr. Lawson submitted sufficient evidence to prove he would likely succeed on the 

merits of his claim for medical and temporary disability benefits. 

2. Whether this Court should grant Mid-South's Motion to compel Mr. Lawson to attend a 

deposition. 

3. Whether this Court should grant Mid-South's Motion to compel Mr. Lawson to attend an 

IME. 

4. Whether Mid-South is entitled to an attorney fee. 

Evidence Submitted 

The only witness was Mr. Lawson. 

The Court designated the following as the technical record: 

• Petition for Benefit Determination 

• Dispute Certification Notice 

• Request for Expedited Hearing 

1 
• Employer's Response to Expedited Hearing 

The Court did not consider attachments to the above filings unless admitted into evidence 

during the Expedited Hearing. The Court considered factual statements in the above filings as 

allegations unless established by the evidence. 

The Court admitted the following into evidence: 

• Exhibit 1: Mr. Lawson's Affidavit dated January 26,2015 (2 pages) 

• Exhibit 2: Nova Medical Center Work Status Form (1 page) 

• Exhibit 3: Dr. Fred Knickerbocker-Medical Notes (16 pages) 

• Exhibit 4: Dr. Patrick Riggins-Medical Notes (4 pages) 

• Exhibit 5: Job Application (2 pages) 

Stipulations of the Parties 

The Parties stipulated the following facts: 

• Mr. Lawson's average weekly wage is $695.34, and his compensation rate is $463.56. 

History of Claim 

Mr. Lawson, a former truck-driver for Mid-South, alleges an injury to his left knee on 

December 16, 2014, as he stepped down from his truck. Mr. Lawson previously provided notice of a 

work injury to Mid-South on August 1, 2014, for an injury to his left calf and knee as he attempted to 

get into a truck. For the August 1, 2014 injury, Mr. Lawson treated with Drs. Fred Knickerbocker 

and Patrick Riggins. 

Dr. Fred Knickerbocker saw Mr. Lawson several times for the August 1, 2014 injury. Mr. 

Lawson's main complaint was knee pain. During the course of treatment, Dr. Knickerbocker 

discovered that Mr. Lawson had a congenital bipartite patella (Exhibit 3, page 11). Mr. Lawson 

underwent injections and physical therapy but continued to complain of pain and clicking in his knee 

(Ex. 3, page 11). Dr. Knickerbocker could not find Mr. Lawson's pain generator, and as a result, 

recommended a second opinion. 

Dr. Riggins saw Mr. Lawson on November 19, 2014, for a second opinion. Dr. Riggins took 

Mr. Lawson's history, noted his prior treatment, and examined his knee (Exhibit 4, page 1). Dr. 

Riggins' impression was a status post left calf strain, status post left knee strain with pain in the 

lateral aspect possibly coming from a grating or snapping Iliotibial (IT) band, and chondromalacia of 

the knee (Ex. 4, page 2). Dr. Riggins directed Mr. Lawson to return to Dr. Knickerbocker or another 

physician for a cortisone injection to the knee, and Xylocaine and steroid injections directly over the 

IT band on the lateral joint line. Dr. Riggins did not recommend surgery, but noted he would 

consider ordering a repeat MRI if Mr. Lawson's knee pain worsened or if a doctor could document 

recurrent swelling or effusion (Ex. 4, page 3). 

2 
Mr. Lawson returned to Dr. Knickerbocker on December 4, 2014, and reported mild pain in 

the medial side of the left knee with popping and sharp pain in the lateral side (Ex. 3, page 12). Dr. 

Knickerbocker injected Mr. Lawson's knee (Ex. 3, page 13). On December 11,2014, Mr. Lawson 

returned to Dr. Knickerbocker. Dr. Knickerbocker noted the injection did not alleviate Mr. Lawson's 

symptoms (Ex. 3, pages 14-15). Dr. Knickerbocker could not find any objective reason for Mr. 

Lawson's complaints. He returned Mr. Lawson to work with no restrictions a:s long as he drove an 

automatic truck (Ex. 3, page 15). Mr. Lawson returned to work for Mid-South. 

On December 16, 2014, Mr. Lawson delivered a load to Electro lux in Memphis, Tennessee. 

As he climbed down from his truck using a three point stance, his left knee bent backwards when he 

placed his full weight on it. The next morning he reported the alleged injury to his supervisor, who 

sent him to Nova Medical Centers (Nova). 

Dr. Bonnie Randolph with Nova saw Mr. Lawson on December 17, 2014. Dr. Randolph 

recorded Mr. Lawson's description of the injury as, "Patient states that he was stepping out of his 

truck when his left knee bent backwards." She diagnosed left knee internal derangement, placed Mr. 

Lawson on light-duty restrictions through December 23, 2014, and recommended follow-up services 

(Exhibit 2). 

After seeing Dr. Randolph, Mr. Lawson returned to his home in Kingsport, Tennessee. MidSouth did not provide any additional medical treatment after December 17, 2014. Mid-South 

terminated Mr. Lawson on December 31, 2014, by letter and listed voluntary resignation as the 

reason for the termination. 

Mr. Lawson worked as a truck driver for a different employer from January 29, 2015, until 

March 17, 2015. 

Mr. Lawson filed a Petition for Benefit Determination (PBD) for temporary disability 

benefits and medical benefits. The parties participated in Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) but 

did not reach an agreement about the issues. 

On February 12,2015, Mid-South's attorney filed aPBD to compel Mr. Lawson to attend an 

independent medical examination (IME). On January 29,2015, Mid-South's attorney filed another 

PBD to compel Mr. Lawson to attend a deposition. The parties participated in ADR but did not 

reach an agreement on the discovery issues. 

The parties presented all identified issues to the Court during an Expedited Hearing on March 

30, 2015. 

Mr. Lawson's Contentions 

Mr. Lawson stated that he suffered a compensable injury when his knee bent backwards on 

December 16, 2014. He requested medical and temporary disability benefits. He acknowledged he 

continued to experience left leg symptoms from his August 1, 2014 injury, up to the December 16, 

2014 alleged injury. 

3 
Concerning the IME, Mr. Lawson felt Mid-South tried to bully him into seeing Dr. 

Knickerbocker. He wanted to see a doctor from a panel of physicians for the December 16, 2014 

injury instead of returning to Dr. Knickerbocker for an IME. He also stated that the nurse case 

manager and Dr. Knickerbocker were "pals" and "best friends," and this kept him from getting 

appropriate care. 

Mr. Lawson did not object to providing deposition testimony if the Court ordered it. 

Mid-South's Contentions 

Mid-South contended that Mr. Lawson suffered an idiopathic injury. It further averred that 

Mr. Lawson has pre-existing medical conditions and the December 16, 2014 injury did not advance 

or exacerbate them. 

Mid-South requested an IME pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-204(d) 

2014 and Rule 35 ofthe Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure. Mid-South contended it is entitled to 

an IME to address whether Mr. Lawson's left knee condition is acute or pre-existing. It further 

asserted that Dr. Knickerbocker would be the best doctor to perform the evaluation since he treated 

Mr. Lawson for his August 1, 2014 injury. Mid-South requested an order compelling Mr. Lawson to 

attend an IME with Dr. Knickerbocker as soon as possible. 

Mid-South requested a deposition according to Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure 

(T.R.C.P.), Rule 27. As mentioned previously, Mr. Lawson did not object to the deposition if the 

Court ordered it. 

Mid-South requested the Court to award an attorney fee in the amount of$390.00 due to the 

time required to bring its discovery motions pursuant to T.R.C.P. 37. 

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 

Standard Applied 

"The Workers' Compensation Law shall not be remedially or liberally construed in favor of either 

party but shall be construed fairly, impartially, and in accordance with basic principles of statutory 

construction favoring neither the employee nor employer." Tenn. Code Ann. 50-6-116 (2014). Tennessee 

Code Annotated section 50-6-239( c)( 6) provides that, "[ u ]nless the statute provides for a different standard 

of proof, at a hearing, the employee shall bear the burden of proving each and every element of the claim by 

a preponderance of the evidence." Tenn. Code Ann. section 50-6-239(c) (2014). A different standard of 

proof exists for the issuance of interlocutory orders at expedited hearings than the standard of proof required 

at compensation hearings. McCord v. Advantage Human Resourcing, No. 2014-06-0063 (Tenn. Work. 

Comp. App. Bd., March 27, 2015). A workers' compensation judge may enter an interlocutory order for 

medical or temporary benefits upon a determination that the injured employee would likely prevail at a 

hearing on the merits. Tenn. Code Ann. 50-6-239(d)(l) (2014); McCall v. Nat'! Health Care Corp., 100 

S.W.3d 209, 214 (Tenn. 2003). 

4 
Factual Findings 

The evidence establishes that Mr. Lawson injured his knee on August 1, 2014. Dr. 

Knickerbocker is the treating physician for Mr. Lawson's August 1, 20 14 injury. When Mr. Lawson 

returned to work from that injury, he continued to suffer symptoms. On December 16, 2014, his 

knee bent backwards while getting out of his truck. Mr. Lawson did not prove any hazard incident to 

his employment that caused his knee to bend backwards. Mid-South did not provide Mr. Lawson 

with a panel of physicians for the December 16, 2014, alleged work injury. Mid-South only 

provided initial treatment at Nova. Mid-South terminated Mr. Lawson on December 31, 2014. Mr. 

Lawson worked for a different employer from January 29, 2015, until March 17, 2015. 

Application of Law to Facts 

The first issue in this case is whether Mr. Lawson submitted sufficient evidence to prove he 

would likely succeed on the merits of his claim for medical and temporary disability benefits. 

Tennessee Code Annotated Section 50-6-102(13)(2014) defines injury as follows: 

"Injury" or "personal injury" mean an injury by accident, a mental injury, 

occupational disease including diseases ofthe heart, lung and hypertension, or 

cumulative trauma conditions including hearing loss, carpal tunnel syndrome 

or any other repetitive motion conditions, arising primarily out of and in the 

course and scope of employment, that causes death, disablement or the need for 

medical treatment of the employee; 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, and shall not include the aggravation of a 

preexisting disease, condition or ailment unless it can 

be shown to a reasonable degree of medical certainty 

that the aggravation arose primarily out of and in the 

course and scope of employment; 

(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. 

5 
Mr. Lawson alleged his knee buckled and he injured his leg when he stepped down out of his 

truck. 

The facts in this case are similar to the facts in Dickerson v. Sari, 2007 Tenn. LEXIS 916, 

(Tenn. Oct. 18, 2007). In Dickerson, the injured employee used a handrail to ascend stairs, and as he 

was doing so his leg buckled. !d. at 2. Even though the employee in Dickerson did not actually fall, 

the court used the term "idiopathic fall" and noted the following: 

An "idiopathic fall" is said to occur when the fall is caused by a 

condition of unknown origin. The cases in which this issue arises 

generally involve either an unexplained seizure or fainting episode, e.g. 

Sudduth v. Williams, 517 S.W.2d 520 (Tenn. 1974), or a knee giving way 

without explanation, e.g. Greeson v. Am. Lava Corp., 216 Tenn. 461, 

392 S.W.2d 931 (Tenn. 1965). An injury caused by such a fall does not 

arise from the employment. So, an unexplained fall onto a bare floor is 

not compensable. Sudduth, 517 S.W.2d at 523. However, if the work 

environment contains an additional risk element, for example, dangerous 

machinery or heights, that enhances the injury that would have otherwise 

occurred, the resulting injury will be compensable. See Phillips v. A&H 

Constr. Co., Inc., 134 S.W.3d 145, 150 (Tenn. 2004). 

Dickerson, 2007 Tenn. LEXIS 916 at 5-6. 

Mr. Lawson has not established that there was an additional employment related risk element 

involved that enhanced his injury. He simply placed his weight on his leg as he would do while 

walking or negotiating stairs. Based upon all the evidence submitted, Mr. Lawson has failed to 

prove he is likely to succeed on the merits of the claim. Therefore, this Court hereby denies Mr. 

Lawson's request for medical and temporary total disability benefits at this time. 

The remaining issue is whether this Court should grant Mid-South's motion to compel Mr. 

Lawson to attend an IME with Dr. Knickerbocker. Mid-South made a request pursuant to statute and 

also the Rules of Civil Procedure. 

Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-204(d)(1)(2014) states: 

The injured employee must submit to examination by the employer's 

physician at all reasonable times if requested to do so by the employer, 

but the employee shall have the right to have the employee's own 

physician present at the examination, in which case the employee shall 

be liable to the employee's physician for that physician's services. 

Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-204(d)(8)(2014) states that the request for 

examination must be a "reasonable request." There is nothing unreasonable about the IME request in 

this case. 

6 
Mid-South relies on Overstreet v. TRW Commercial Steering Division, 253 S.W.3d 626 

(Tenn. 2008), and Myers v. Vanderbilt Univ., 2010 LEXIS 443 (W.C. Panel 2010) to support its 

position on entitlement to an IME. Tennessee courts have consistently held that employers are 

entitled to a reasonable examination by their doctor. Mid-South has proven that it is entitled to an 

IME because the issue of Mr. Lawson's leg injury remains. 

However, this Court has found that Dr. Knickerbocker is the "treating physician" for Mr. 

Lawson's August 1, 2014 injury. As such, Dr. Knickerbocker is placed in an untenable position ifhe 

serves as the employer's physician for the present injury. It seems he cannot serve as the 

"employer's physician" for his subsequent alleged injury while at the same time serving as the 

treating physician regarding his first injury. Ms. Lawson shall attend an IME with Mid-South's 

designated physician, but that said physician should be someone other than Dr. Knickerbocker. 

In its Response Brief, Mid-South requested attorney fees pursuant to T.R.C.P. Rule 37.01(4). 

This Court may award attorney fees to a party that brings a successful Motion to Compel Discovery 

if an opposing party fails to answer a question during a deposition, fails to answer an interrogatory, 

or fails to respond to a request for inspection. T.R.C.P. Rule 3 7.01 (2). Mid-South failed to establish 

that Mr. Lawson refused to answer a question during a deposition. Rule 3 7.01 does not mention IME 

requests are subject to an attorney fee. Therefore, Mid-South's request for an attorney fee is denied. 

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows: 

1. Mr. Lawson's claim against Mid-South or its workers' compensation carrier for the requested 

temporary disability and medical benefits is denied at this time. 

2. Mr. Lawson shall attend a deposition set by counsel for Mid-South within thirty (30) days of 

this order. 

3. Mr. Lawson shall attend an IME with employer's doctor. 

4. Mid-South's request for attorney fees is denied. 

5. This matter is set for Initial Hearing on June 4, 2015, at 2:00p.m. eastern time. 

ENTERED this the 15th day of April 2015. 

BRIAN K. ADDINGTON 

Workers' Compensation Judge 

7 
[rritial Hearing: 

An Initial Hearing has been set with Judge Brian K. Addington, Court of Workers 

Compensation. You must call 865-594-6538 or toll free at 855-543-5044 to participate in the Initial 

Hearing. 

Please Note: You must call in on June 4, 2015, at 2:00p.m. Eastern Time to participate. 

Failure to call in may result in a determination of the issues without your further participation. 

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: 

1. Complete the enclosed form entitled: "Expedited Hearing Notice of Appeal". 

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 ofhaving 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 ofthe evidence within ten (10) calendar days ofthe filing ofthe 

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. 

8 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the Expedited Hearing Order was sent to the 

following recipients by the following methods of service on this the 15th day of April, 2015. 

Name Certified First Via Fax Via Email Address 

Mail Class Fax Number Email 

Mail 

James Lawson X southpawedl@yahoo.com 

Allen Callison, Esq. X acallison(iiJeraclides.com 

P .r NYSHRUM 

C ~ RK OF THE COURT 

9