TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION

IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS

AT NASHVILLE

NAOMI PATTON, )

 Employee, ) Docket No. 2019-06-0796

)

v. )

) State File No. 29170-2019

LAKESHORE HEARTLAND,

 Employer,

PREMIER GROUP INSURANCE 

COMPANY,

 Carrier.

)

)

)

)

)

)

Judge Joshua D. Baker

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER DENYING BENEFITS

The Court convened an October 10, 2019 expedited hearing to consider whether 

Ms. Patton is likely to prove the compensability of two alleged injuries to her left hand 

and arm. As Ms. Patton failed to file her claim within the statute of limitations for her 

March 23, 2018 injury, and because she did not show she is likely to prove her June 3, 

2018 injury is work-related, the Court denies her requested relief. 

Claim History

On her April 18, 2019 Petition for Benefit Determination, Ms. Patton alleged two

work injuries to her left-upper extremity that arose from handling patients: one on March 

23, 2018 and another on June 3, 2018. She described each incident in detail. According 

to the adjuster’s signed declaration, Lakeshore never paid workers’ compensation 

benefits for either alleged injury due to Ms. Patton’s history of carpal tunnel syndrome.

Ms. Patton’s medical records reference prior carpal tunnel surgeries and also note 

she complained of continuing carpal tunnel symptoms both before and after each alleged 

work incident. The records show that at least two years earlier before her alleged work 

injuries, doctors diagnosed Ms. Patton with repeat bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome based 

FILED

Oct 23, 2019

01:58 PM(CT)

TENNESSEE COURT OF

WORKERS' COMPENSATION

CLAIMS
2

on complaints of “pain and numbness that comes down into the arms with her left arm 

being worse than her right.” The records from a 2017 visit with her personal physician,

Dr. James Rubright, state that she told him about her prior carpal tunnel release surgeries 

and complained of bilateral hand pain, mainly in her left hand. After the March 23 

incident, she complained to Dr. Rubright of increased hand pain but again acknowledged

that “she did have pain in both of her hands and wrist before this injury.” 

At the hearing, Lakeshore contended Ms. Patton did not provide them an 

opportunity to provide authorized treatment following the alleged March 23 incident. 

Instead, she portrayed her condition as preexisting and insisted on seeing Dr. Rubright. 

Ms. Patton denied she declined treatment under workers’ compensation but continued to 

see Dr. Rubright. 

Dr. Rubright treated Ms. Patton again for carpal tunnel syndrome and 

osteoarthritis in her hands, but none of his records connects her condition to her 

employment. On March 26, 2018, he noted from imaging that she had no sign of an 

acute injury but had “diffuse degenerative change,” and he diagnosed “[b]ilateral hand 

primary osteoarthritis.” Notably, his records do not capture any complaint from Ms. 

Patton of a June 3 work accident, even though he treated her only a few weeks after the 

alleged incident. 

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

To prevail at an expedited hearing, Ms. Patton must show that she is likely to 

prevail at a hearing on the merits. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(1) (2018). She 

failed to carry this burden.

Recovery for Ms. Patton’s March 23, 2018 injury is barred by the statute of 

limitations. Statutes of limitations exist to ensure fairness by prohibiting undue delay in 

bringing claims and to provide defendants timely notice of potential lawsuits. See 

American Pipe & Constr. Co. v. Utah, 414 U.S. 538, 554-55 (1974). An employee’s 

right to compensation is forever barred unless a petition for benefit determination is filed 

within one year after the accident resulting in injury. Tenn. Code Ann. section 50-6-

203(b)(1). The employer has the burden of proving that the statute of limitations bars a 

claim. Once the employer establishes those facts, the employee must prove that an 

exception exists or the claim is barred. See Cloyd v. Hartco Flooring Co., 274 S.W.3d 

638, 647 (Tenn. 2008) (citing Ingram v. Earthman, 993 S.W.2d 611, 633; Jones v. Coal 

Creek Mining & Mfg. Co., 180 S.W. 179, 182 (Tenn. 1915). 

Here, Ms. Patton’s petition alleged a March 23 injury, yet she did not file a 

petition to claim benefits until over a year later on April 18, 2019. Further, the Court 

finds Lakeshore did not pay workers’ compensations benefits to or for Ms. Patton 

concerning either of her alleged injuries. Consequently, the Court holds that Ms. Patton 
3

failed to prove she is likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits concerning her March 23, 

2018 injury, as she filed her petition beyond the statute of limitations. 

Next, the Court addresses Ms. Patton’s request for expedited relief concerning her 

June 3 claim. In Workers’ Compensation Law, “injury” means an injury by accident, 

including a cumulative trauma condition, which arises primarily out of and in the course 

and scope of employment. Tenn. Code Ann. section 50-6-102(14). An injury “arises 

primarily out of the course and scope of employment” if the “employment contributed 

more than fifty percent (50%) in causing the injury, considering all causes.” Id. at 50-6-

102(14)(B). Unless an injury is obvious, an “employee must present expert medical 

proof that the alleged injury is causally related to the employment.” Berdnik v. Fairfield 

Glade Cmty Club, 2017 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 32, at *11. Lay testimony 

alone will not suffice. See Scott v. Integrity Staffing Solutions, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. 

App. Bd. LEXIS 24, at *12 (Aug. 18, 2015) (“Employee's lay testimony in this case, 

without corroborative expert testimony, did not constitute adequate evidence of medical 

causation.”).

Thus, to succeed at a hearing on the merits, Ms. Patton must produce medical

evidence that the June 3 work accident is the primary cause of her condition. None of Dr. 

Rubright’s records regarding treatment rendered shortly after her alleged June 3 accident 

mentioned an acute injury at work on that date. 

While Ms. Patton questions the accuracy of these records, the absence of any 

complaints of a work-related cause correlates with the defense testimony that she 

declined medical care under workers’ compensation in favor of continuing treatment with 

Dr. Rubright. Thus, the Court finds it unlikely that she would prevail at a hearing on the 

merits in proving the compensability of her June 3 claim and denies her requested relief. 

It is ORDERED as follows:

1. Ms. Patton’s claim for medical and temporary disability benefits is denied at this 

time. 

2. This matter is set for a status conference on Monday, December 2, 2019, at 10:00 

a.m. (CST). You must call 615-741-2113 to participate in the hearing. 

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

participation

ENTERED OCTOBER 23, 2019.
4

_____________________________________ 

 Joshua Davis Baker, Judge 

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

APPENDIX 

Exhibits: 

1. Medical Records

2. Ms. Patton’s affidavit

3. Declaration of Mr. Porter Nelms

4. Declaration of Ms. Valerie Henderson 

5. Change of Status Forms 

6. Partner Time Collection Reports 

7. Text Messages

8. Wage Statements 

9. Documents attached to Ms. Patton’s Request for Expedited Hearing

Technical Record: 

1. Request for Expedited Hearing 

2. Dispute Certification Notice

3. Petition for Benefit Determination 
5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of this Order was sent as indicated on October 23, 2019.

Name Certified 

Mail

Via

Fax

Via 

Email

Service sent to:

Naomi Patton,

Employee

X Naomi.patton1949@gmail.com

Frank Gallina,

Employer’s Attorney

X fgallina@plcslaw.com

_____________________________________

Penny Shrum, Clerk

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

WC.CourtClerk@tn.gov