TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION 

IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS

AT NASHVILLE 

ABDUL ODEM, ) Docket No. 2016-06-0657

Employee, )

v. ) State File No. 26740-2016

TYSON FOODS, )

Employer. ) Judge Joshua Davis Baker

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER DENYING TEMPORARY DISABILITY AND 

MEDICAL BENEFITS

This claim came before the Court on November 3, 2016, on the Request for 

Expedited Hearing (REH) filed by Abdul Odem pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated 

section 50-6-239 (2015). At issue is Mr. Odem’s entitlement to temporary total disability 

and medical benefits for bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). The parties do not 

dispute that Mr. Odem suffered from bilateral CTS. However, Tyson Foods has raised 

lack of notice and compensability as defenses. Based on the proof before it, the Court 

denies Mr. Odem’s claim for temporary disability and medical benefits at this time.

1

History of Claim

In June 2015, Mr. Odem began working as a truck loader in Tyson’s food 

processing plant. His duties mainly included using a pallet jack to transport boxes of 

food from the packaging area to the shipping area. Mr. Odem explained that the pallet 

jack, or “mule,” had a throttle that he had to constantly manipulate while driving several 

miles through the plant each day. He stated that, after working in that position for 

approximately a month to a month and a half, he began experiencing pain, numbness, 

throbbing and burning in both hands. He even experienced the pain in his sleep and 

testified that sometimes he slept only two or three hours and other times he did not sleep. 

Due to a work schedule that provided him three consecutive days off each week, Mr. 

Odem testified he worked with the pain for four days and then saw a doctor and “healed 

up” over his three days off. 

 

1 A complete listing of the technical record and exhibits admitted at the Expedited Hearing is attached to this Order 

as an appendix.
2

On October 15, Mr. Odem sought treatment through his private insurance from Dr. 

Philip Coogan. Dr. Coogan diagnosed Mr. Odem with severe bilateral CTS and 

administered several cortisone shots before scheduling surgery for March 18, 2016. 

Because the pain was severe, Dr. Coogan advanced the surgery date and performed the 

operation on March 4. (Ex. 1 at 1.) 

In a medical note prepared several weeks after surgery, Dr. Coogan wrote the 

following concerning the cause of Mr. Odem’s bilateral CTS: “The patient describes 

moving thousands of the cases a day, 32 cases per pallet, 30 pallets per truck and 4 to 6 

trucks a day. I believe it is the arithmetic. This certainly sounds like it could be a 

significant contributor to his current complaints.” (Ex. 1 at 7.) 

Mr. Odem did not report his condition to Tyson as work-related until after he had 

surgery. (Ex. 5.) Just prior to his surgery, Mr. Odem told Crystal Whitelaw, a Tyson 

human resources employee, that he would need to be out to have surgery. In an affidavit, 

Ms. Whitelaw stated Mr. Odem visited her to inquire about receiving short-term 

disability benefits. (Ex. 9 at 1.) Mr. Odem agreed he did not tell Ms. Whitelaw that the 

surgery could be related to his work for Tyson at that time. 

Mr. Odem gave several reasons for failing to report his bilateral CTS to 

Tyson. He first testified he did not know he had to report the condition to a supervisor. 

However, on cross-examination he acknowledged receiving notification of his duty to 

report a workplace injury when his employment with Tyson ensued. (Exs. 10, 11.) He 

then stated that he did not want to miss work because of his injury. He described his job 

as “competitive,” and feared he could lose it if he had to take time off for treatment. 

However, after he learned he would have to miss work for an extended period to recover, 

Mr. Odem stated he had no choice but to report his condition to Tyson. 

After he reported his condition, Tyson provided Mr. Odem a panel of physicians. 

On March 15, he selected Dr. C. Robinson Dyer. (Ex. 8 at 3.) Dr. Dyer declined to treat 

Mr. Odem, so he next selected Dr. David Moore from the same panel. Id. at 2. Dr. 

Moore also declined to treat him, so he selected the last physician remaining on the panel, 

Dr. Steve Salyers. Id. at 1. Mr. Odem also signed a form acknowledging he received the

panel and selected a physician from it. (Ex. 14.) 

Dr. Salyers saw Mr. Odem only one time for an examination. Mr. Odem 

described the examination as very brief, lasting only three minutes. In the medical report 

from that visit he wrote: 

Severe carpal tunnel syndrome would not develop in the two to three 

months that he had worked for [sic] at Tyson doing that particular job. I 

can state that with greater than 51% reasonable degree of medical certainty. 

In short, under the Tennessee statute, I do not think there is an established 
3

causal relationship between his occupation exposure and his carpal tunnel 

syndrome. A much more likely causal fact is his 290 pound weight and 

morbid obesity. 

(Ex. 1 at 28.) Given the results of the examination, Dr. Salyers declined to provide 

further care for Mr. Odem. 

After receiving the causation opinion from Dr. Salyers, Tyson denied the claim. 

(Ex. 6.) Thereafter, Mr. Odem filed a Petition for Benefit Determination seeking medical 

and temporary disability benefits. (T.R. 1 at 1.) After the parties failed to resolve their 

disputes through mediation, the mediator issued a Dispute Certification Notice vesting 

jurisdiction in this Court. (T.R. 2 at 2.) Mr. Odem filed a Request for Expedited 

Hearing, and this Court convened an evidentiary hearing to consider the claim.

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

In deciding Mr. Odem’s request for additional medical benefits and temporary 

disability benefits, the Court must apply the following legal principles. Mr. Odem bears 

the burden of proof on all prima facie elements of his workers’ compensation claim. 

Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(6) (2015); see also Buchanan v. Carlex Glass Co., No. 

2015-01-0012, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 39, at *5 (Tenn. Workers’ Comp. 

App. Bd. Sept. 29, 2015). He need not prove every element of his claim by a 

preponderance of the evidence in order to obtain relief at an expedited hearing. McCord 

v. Advantage Human Resourcing, No. 2014-06-0063, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. 

LEXIS 6, at *7-8, 9 (Tenn. Workers’ Comp. App. Bd. Mar. 27, 2015). Instead, Mr. 

Odem has the burden to come forward with sufficient evidence from which this Court can 

determine he is likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits. Id.

Mr. Odem seeks temporary disability and medical benefits for bilateral CTS. As 

explained below, the Court finds he is not entitled to either category of benefits at this 

time. 

1. Mr. Odem provided Tyson notice of his injury in a timely manner. 

Tyson raised lack of notice as a defense arguing that Mr. Odem failed to give 

notice within thirty days of the time he knew of a work-related injury. Because the notice 

issue is potentially determinative, the Court will address it first.

Mr. Odem seeks workers’ compensation benefits for bilateral CTS, which he 

allegedly developed gradually. Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Law provides the 

following concerning notice of gradual injuries:
4

(b) In those cases where the injury occurs as the result of gradual or 

cumulative events or trauma, then the injured employee or the injured 

employee’s representative shall provide notice of the injury to the employer 

within thirty (30) days after the employee:

(1) Knows or reasonably should know that the employee has 

suffered a work-related injury that has resulted in permanent 

physical impairment; or

(2) Is rendered unable to continue to perform the employee’s 

normal work activities as the result of the work-related injury 

and the employee knows or reasonably should know that the 

injury was caused by work-related activities. 

Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-201(b) (2015). 

Here, Mr. Odem began suffering symptoms of bilateral CTS a month or a month 

and a half after he began working for Tyson. However, he continued to perform his 

normal work activities despite suffering pain from the condition. It was not until March 

2016 that he learned he would be unable to work for an extended period of time while he 

recovered. On March 15, eleven days after his surgery, he notified Tyson he needed to 

take time off. Taking time off from work completely would obviously prevent Mr. Odem 

from performing his normal work activities. At that time, Tyson offered Mr. Odem a 

panel. Accordingly, Tyson had notice of Mr. Odem’s bilateral CTS condition and its 

potential causal relationship to work within thirty days of the condition rendering him 

unable to perform his normal work activities. For that reason, Tyson’s notice defense 

must fail. 

2. Mr. Odem failed to show a causal relationship between his injury and his 

work for Tyson

Tennessee law requires an employer to provide “free of charge to the employee 

such medical and surgical treatment . . . made reasonably necessary by accident as 

defined in this chapter[.]” See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-204(a)(l)(A) (2015). In 

providing the treatment, the Workers’ Compensation Law requires an employer to, 

“designate a group of three (3) or more independent reputable physicians, surgeons, 

chiropractors or specialty practice groups if available in the injured employee’s 

community or, if not so available, in accordance with subdivision (a)(3)(B), from which 

the injured employee shall select one (1) to be the treating physician.” Id. at 50-6-

204(a)(3)(A)(i). In cases where the employer provides a panel and the physician selected 

by the employee declines to provide treatment, the employee has two options: (1) select a 

physician from the remaining choices on the panel, or (2) ask that the employer place 

another physician on the panel to replace the physician who declined to provide 
5

treatment. Id. at § 50-6-204(a)(3)(G). 

Through process of elimination, Mr. Odem selected Dr. Salyers as the authorized 

treating physician. He first selected the other two panel physicians, but each declined to 

treat him. He then chose Dr. Salyers, the last physician remaining on the panel. 

Although Mr. Odem could have required Tyson to replace the physicians who declined to 

treat him, he did not testify that he asked Tyson do so. Accordingly, Mr. Odem selected 

Dr. Salyers from a valid panel, and he is Mr. Odem’s authorized treating physician for his 

CTS. 

The Workers’ Compensation Law affords a presumption of correctness to the 

causation opinion provided by a physician selected from a panel; however, the 

presumption can be rebutted through presentation of contrary evidence that satisfies a 

preponderance standard. Id. at § 50-6-102(14)(E). Furthermore, any medical opinion 

supporting causation must be provided by the physician within a “reasonable degree of 

medical certainty.” The Workers’ Compensation Law defines the phrase “shown to a 

reasonable degree of medical certainty” to mean that, “in the opinion of the physician, it 

is more likely than not considering all causes, as opposed to speculation or possibility.” 

Id. at § 50-6-102(14)(D) (2015). 

Dr. Salyers’ medical report stated that Mr. Odem’s work for Tyson did not cause 

his bilateral CTS. He wrote: “Severe carpal tunnel syndrome would not develop in the 

two to three months that he had worked for [sic] at Tyson doing that particular job. I can 

state that with greater than 51% reasonable degree of medical certainty.” (Ex. 1 at 28.) 

Instead, Dr. Salyers believed Mr. Odem’s CTS stemmed from weight and “morbid 

obesity.” This opinion is presumed correct, and Mr. Odem must rebut that presumption 

in order to prevail. 

The only other causation opinion in the record comes from Dr. Coogan. In his

medical records, he stated that Mr. Odem’s work for Tyson moving pallets of packaged 

food “certainly sounds like it could be a significant contributor to his current 

complaints.”2 (Ex. 1 at 7.) The Court finds Dr. Coogan’s opinion speculative in that he 

opined Mr. Odem’s work activities “could be a significant contributor to his current 

complaints.” Because Dr. Coogan’s opinion is speculative, it is insufficient to overcome 

the presumption of correctness attached to Dr. Salyers’ opinion. Accordingly, the Court 

holds that Mr. Odem is unlikely to prevail at a hearing on the merits in proving he 

suffered a compensable workplace injury. Furthermore, because Mr. Odem cannot prove 

 

2 Mr. Odem attempted to introduce a May 2, 2016 medical record from Dr. Coogan, which provided a much stronger 

causation opinion, as an exhibit. Tyson objected to admission of the medical record because counsel claimed to 

have not seen the record until the day of the hearing. Mr. Odem said he believed he emailed a copy of the record to 

Tyson prior to the hearing. The Court accepted the record for identification purposes and gave Mr. Odem until 

November 10 to file a copy of the email showing he forwarded the record to Tyson. Mr. Odem failed to file the 

email. The Court, therefore, sustains Tyson’s objection. 
6

his injury is compensable, the Court denies his claim for medical benefits. Applying the 

same principle—lack of a causal relationship between Mr. Odem’s work for Tyson and 

his bilateral CTS—the Court also denies Mr. Odem’s claim for temporary disability 

benefits. 

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows:

1. Mr. Odem’s claim for temporary disability and medical benefits is denied. 

2. This matter is set for an Initial (Scheduling) Hearing on January 13, 2017, at 11:00 

a.m. (CST).

ENTERED THIS THE 29th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2016.

________________________________________

Judge Joshua Davis Baker

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

Initial Hearing:

An Initial with Judge Joshua Davis Baker, Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims. 

You must call 615-741-2113 or toll free at 855-874-0474 to participate in the Initial 

Hearing.

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:

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

2. File the completed form with the Court Clerk within seven business days of the 

date the Workers’ Compensation Judge entered the Expedited Hearing Order.

3. Serve a copy of the Expedited Hearing Notice of Appeal upon the opposing party.
7

4. The appealing party is responsible for payment of a filing fee in the amount of 

$75.000. Within ten calendar days after the filing of a notice of appeal, payment 

must be received by check, money order, or credit card payment. Payments can be 

made in person at any Bureau office or by United States mail, hand-delivery, or 

other delivery service. In the alternative, the appealing party may file an Affidavit 

of Indigency, on a form prescribed by the Bureau, seeking a waiver of the filing 

fee. The Affidavit of Indigency may be filed contemporaneously with the Notice 

of Appeal or must be filed within ten calendar days thereafter. The Appeals Board 

will consider the Affidavit of Indigency and issue an Order granting or denying 

the request for a waiver of the filing fee as soon thereafter as is practicable. 

Failure to timely pay the filing fee or file the Affidavit of Indigency in 

accordance with this section shall result in dismissal of the appeal.

5. 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 calendar days of the filing of the Expedited 

Hearing Notice of Appeal. Alternatively, the parties may file a joint statement of 

the evidence within ten calendar days of the filing of the Expedited Hearing 

Notice of Appeal. The statement of the evidence must convey a complete and 

accurate account of what transpired in the Court of Workers’ Compensation 

Claims and must be approved by the workers’ compensation judge before the 

record is submitted to the clerk of the Appeals Board.

6. If the appellant elects to file a position statement in support of the interlocutory 

appeal, the appellant shall file such position statement with the Court Clerk within 

five business days of the expiration of the time to file a transcript or statement of 

the evidence, specifying the issues presented for review and including any 

argument in support thereof. A party opposing the appeal shall file a response, if 

any, with the Court Clerk within five business days of the filing of the appellant’s 

position statement. All position statements pertaining to an appeal of an 

interlocutory order should include: (1) a statement summarizing the facts of the 

case from the evidence admitted during the expedited hearing; (2) a statement 

summarizing the disposition of the case as a result of the expedited hearing; (3) a 

statement of the issue(s) presented for review; and (4) an argument, citing 

appropriate statutes, case law, or other authority.
8

APPENDIX 

Exhibits:

1. Medical records 

2. May 2 medical note of Dr. Coogan (For identification purposes only)

3. Mr. Odem’s affidavit

4. Edward Covington’s affidavit

5. First Report of Injury

6. Notice of Claim Denial

7. Wage Statement

8. Choice of Physician Forms

9. Affidavits of Crystal Whitelaw, Chris Rawls, Woody Dodds

10.Team Member Orientation Training checklist 

11.Safety statement

12.Leave of Absence application

13.Team Member Statement of Injury

14.Choice of Physician Form Acknowledgement

15.Statement of financial responsibility

Technical record:

3

1. PBD filed April 13 2016

2. DCN filed May 10, 2016

3. REH filed July 8, 2016 

4. Tyson’s Response to Mr. Odem’s Request for Expedited Hearing

5. Tyson’s Witness and Exhibit List

6. Tyson’s Response to Mr. Odem’s REH on the Record

7. Tyson’s Response to Mr. Odem’s REH 

 

3

The Court did not consider attachments to Technical Record filings unless admitted into evidence during the 

Expedited Hearing. The Court considered factual statements in these filings or any attachments to them as 

allegations unless established by the evidence.
9

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was sent to the 

following recipients by the following methods of service on this the 29th day of 

November, 2016.

Name Certified 

Mail

Via 

Fax

Via 

Email

Email Address

Abdul Odem X X 323 Forrest Park Rd. Apt. 7-5

Madison, Tennessee 37115

abdul.odem@gmail.com

Laurenn 

Disspayne

X ldisppayne@mainerherod.com

_______________________________________

Penny Shrum, Court Clerk

Wc.courtclerk@tn.gov