1

TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION

IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS 

AT NASHVILLE

Man Thi Le, ) Docket No. 2023-06-6704

Employee, )

v. )

Sumitomo Electric Wiring Systems,

Inc.,

)

) State File No. 72362-2023

Employer, )

And )

Mitsui Sumitomo Ins. USA, Inc., )

Carrier. ) Judge Kenneth M. Switzer

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER DENYING BENEFITS

Man Thi Le requested benefits at an expedited hearing on August 8, 2024. She 

suffers from carpal tunnel syndrome that she claimed resulted from her work at Sumitomo. 

Sumitomo denied the claim, contending that her condition did not arise primarily out of 

her employment. The Court finds she is unlikely to prove at a hearing on the merits that 

her work was the primary cause of her injury and denies her request.

Claim History

Per Ms. Le’s affidavit, she reported suffering a repetitive motion injury to her hands 

on September 16, 2023. She had worked approximately 60 hours per week rolling and 

coiling electrical wiring. According to Ms. Le, Sumitomo immediately denied her request 

for treatment. She testified that she went to the emergency room twice on her own but 

offered no records from either visit.

Ms. Le saw Dr. Clinton Morgan on her own on September 25, where she reported 

weakness in her hands and 2/5 hand grip strength. Dr. Morgan wrote, “She is losing 

function in her hands and cannot do her work. She has visible atrophy in her hands as well 

on the right side, worse than the left side, which is now starting to progress to the left side.”

Ms. Le saw her regular provider, a nurse practitioner, in early October, who 

FILED

Aug 13, 2024

07:00 AM(CT)

TENNESSEE COURT OF

WORKERS' COMPENSATION

CLAIMS
2

diagnosed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. Release surgery was scheduled but never 

performed because Sumitomo denied the claim on November 10.

Ms. Le offered a note from Dr. Morgan, where he later gave the following opinion:

Ms. Le testified that she has been fully disabled from working since September 19, 

2023. She requested a panel of hand-specialist physicians. Sumitomo countered, in part,

that her requests should be denied because the injury did not arise primarily out of 

employment. 

Sumitomo also contended that her carpal tunnel syndrome preexisted her 

employment with it and pointed to medical records from March and June, 2023. In the 

earlier visit, she reported “multiple joints pain” in several body parts including her hands. 

She also complained of numbness in all fingertips of both hands. At the follow-up, she 

reported the same complaints, which were worsening. The nurse practitioner diagnosed 

“multiple joint pain” and “numbness of hand.” He wrote, “[R]efer to hand orthopedic for 

further evaluation. Likely CTS?”1

1 Sumitomo offered detailed testimony from Ms. Le’s supervisor and its human resources director about the 

circumstances of Ms. Le reporting the alleged injury and her termination. However, Sumitomo has not 

raised a notice defense. Further, given the ruling that Ms. Le is unlikely to prove at a hearing on the merits 

that her carpal tunnel syndrome arose primarily out of her employment, the Court need not recount this 

testimony.
3

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

To grant Ms. Le’s requests, she must show she is likely to prevail at a hearing on 

the merits. Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(1) (2023); McCord v. Advantage Human 

Resourcing, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS 6, at *7-8, 9 (Mar. 27, 2015).

As a threshold issue, Ms. Le must show that her carpal tunnel syndrome meets the 

definition of “injury” under the Workers’ Compensation Law. Section 50-6-102(12) 

specifically lists as compensable “carpal tunnel syndrome . . . arising primarily out of and 

in the course and scope of employment, that causes . . . disablement or the need for medical 

treatment.” Further, she must show “to a reasonable degree of medical certainty” that her

work “contributed more than fifty percent (50%) in causing the . . . disablement or need 

for medical treatment.” Id. at -102(12)(B)-(C). “Shown to a reasonable degree of medical 

certainty” means that in the physician’s opinion, “it is more likely than not, considering all 

causes, as opposed to speculation or possibility.” Id. at -102(12)(D).

Here, the Court has only Dr. Morgan’s medical opinion. Sumitomo argued that his 

opinion does not meet the above definition. Ms. Le suffers from carpal tunnel syndrome 

and needs surgery. The question is whether she is likely to show at a hearing on the merits 

that her work caused her condition or need for treatment.

Dr. Morgan’s opinion is expressed using a percentage favorable to Ms. Le’s 

position, but it also conveys uncertainty. He has examined Ms. Le and reviewed the results 

of her diagnostic testing. He considered her work: “bending and flexing her hands 

frequently, this is an extremely high risk activity for developing carpal tunnel syndrome.” 

Dr. Morgan continued, “It is entirely possible that the nature of this work has significantly 

contributed more than 50% to her symptom development; however I do not have a baseline 

examination before she began this work to know how she functioned beforehand[.]” 

(Emphasis added). While the first clause of that sentence states that a greater than 50% 

chance exists that Ms. Le’s work caused her carpal tunnel syndrome, the second clause 

injects doubt when Dr. Morgan expresses the need to consider a “baseline examination.” 

Moreover, the statute expressly rejects “possibility” and requires greater certainty.

Ms. Le had complained of numbness in her hands to a nurse practitioner in March 

and June, 2023—several months before the date of injury—and in June, the nurse 

practitioner noted that he suspected carpal tunnel syndrome. Apparently Dr. Morgan did 

not have that information. 

Given Dr. Morgan’s desire for more information before cementing his opinion, and 

the treatment notes pre-dating the injury at work, the Court cannot find at this time that Ms. 
4

Le is likely to prove at trial that her carpal tunnel syndrome arose primarily out of her 

employment.

2

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED AS FOLLOWS:

1. Ms. Le’s requests for medical and temporary disability benefits are denied.

2. The Court sets a status hearing on November 12, 2024, at 1:30 p.m. Central Time. 

You must call 615-532-9552 or 866-943-0025 to participate.

ENTERED August 13, 2024.

________________________________________

JUDGE KENNETH M. SWITZER

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims

2 Sumitomo also argued that Ms. Le knowingly and willfully misrepresented her previous injuries/physical 

condition in a post-offer medical questionnaire. Given the ruling above, however, the Court does not need 

to address this contention.
5

Appendix

Exhibits:

1. Ms. Le’s Affidavit

2. Ms. Le’s deposition transcript

3. Dr. Morgan December 22, 2023 note and April 2024 referral

4. Employer’s composite medical records

5. Denial

6. Ms. Le’s deposition transcript

7. Text messages between Ms. Le and James Dillon

8. Text messages between Ms. Le and Israel Ocampo

9. Sumitomo-Medical history form

10.Request for Information-Medical Statement-Dr. Morgan

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of the Order was sent as indicated on August 13, 2024.

Name Mail Email Service sent to:

David Weatherman,

Employee’s Attorney 

X david@theweathermanfirm.com

Jeffrey Taylor, 

Employer’s Attorney

X jeff@taylorlawfirmtn.com

kathy@taylorlawfirm.com

_____________________________________

PENNY SHRUM, Court Clerk

WC.CourtClerk@tn.gov
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.

 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.

 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 (check one or more applicable boxes and include the date filestamped on the first page of the order(s) being appealed):

□ 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]