BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G DIANE PARKER, EMPLOYEE OPINION FILED NOVEMBER 2, 2015

Transcription

1 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. G DIANE PARKER, EMPLOYEE ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, EMPLOYER PUBLIC EMPLOYEE CLAIMS DIVISION, INSURANCE CARRIER CLAIMANT RESPONDENT RESPONDENT OPINION FILED NOVEMBER 2, 2015 Hearing was held before Administrative Law Judge Elizabeth W. Hogan on August 21, 2015, in Pine Bluff, Arkansas. Claimant represented by Mr. Jeffery H. Kearney, Attorney-at-Law, of Pine Bluff, Arkansas. Respondents represented by Mr. Charles H. McLemore, Jr., Attorney-at-Law, of Little Rock, Arkansas. ISSUES A hearing was conducted to determine the claimant s entitlement fo payment of medical expenses, temporary total disability benefits and attorney s fees. At issue is the compensability of the claim pursuant to Ark. Code Ann and All other issues are reserved. After reviewing the evidence impartially, without giving benefit of the doubt to either party, Ark. Code Ann , I find the evidence does not preponderate in favor of the claimant. STATEMENT OF THE CASE The parties stipulated to an employee-employer-carrier relationship on May 13, 2011, at which time the claimant was earning sufficient wages to be entitled to a compensation rate of $363.00/$ in the event this claim is found to be compensable. Some medical expenses were paid before this claim was controverted. The claimant contends she was injured when she was electrocuted by a search light. She seeks payment of medical expenses incurred with Southeast

2 PARKER - G Arkansas Behavioral Healthcare and temporary total disability benefits from May, 2011, to a date yet to be determined. The respondents contend there was no objective medical evidence of a physical injury to substantiate compensability or mental illness. The following were submitted without objection and comprise the evidence of record: the parties pre-hearing questionnaires and exhibits contained in the transcript. The parties stated at the pre-hearing conference that they were ready for the case to be set for a hearing. On the day of the hearing, the claimant complained that the respondents had not complied with a subpoena, which had been requested shortly before the hearing, regarding maintenance records. Respondent s objection to the psychiatric records was sustained as they had not been provided in a timely manner. These problems reflect a lack of diligence that did not warrant exceptions or rescheduling of the hearing. The following witnesses testified at the hearing: the claimant and her estranged husband Eddie Parker; the claimant s friend from cosmetology school, Tiffany Stewart; and Major Kenny Bolden. Major Bolden was not even at work on the day of the claimant s accident so it was unclear why the claimant called him as a witness. The claimant, age 59 (D.O.B. April 5, 1956), has a high school education with two (2) years of college. She is right hand dominant. The claimant is also a licensed cosmetologist and barber. She taught at the local cosmetology school while working for the respondent employer and continued working there ($80.00 weekly) for three (3) to four (4) months after the accident with the respondent employer. The claimant filed for Social Security and was approved in July, 2014, ($ monthly). The claimant s health history includes left hand carpal tunnel syndrome with trigger finger and thumb surgery.

3 PARKER - G The claimant began work for the respondent employer in 2010 as a correction officer. Her job duties included searching barracks, escorting inmates, and making sure the prisoners were secure. She worked twelve (12) hour shifts, two (2) days on, three (3) days off, from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. On Saturday, May 13, 2011, the claimant was instructed to report to the guard tower around 8:00 p.m. or 8:30 p.m. She had not worked in this tower before that night. Around 9:00 p.m., she walked out on the catwalk to perform a security check and touched the light switch. The backing to the spotlight was missing and her left hand went inside the light where she was shocked. Her thumb was blackened and she was taken to the emergency room for treatment. She returned to work June 1, 2011, after a few days off work (less than a week) at her regular duties with no restrictions. She resigned after working a day or two due to panic attacks and an inability to concentrate. She did, however, continue teaching at the cosmetology school for several months. At the urging of her family, she sought treatment with Southeast Behavioral Clinic in September, 2011, for depression, memory loss, panic-attacks and low selfesteem. Eddie Parker is a pastor and supervisor at Central Moloney. He is estranged from his wife due to his infidelity. The claimant lives with her son. He testified that he observed the black mark on his wife s hand after the accident. She seemed light-headed and confused after the shock. Mr. Parker feels that his wife is depressed and her memory has been affected due to the shock. Tiffany Stewart, a student at the cosmetology school, testified that she met the claimant in April, She noticed a personality change in the claimant after the accident. The claimant seemed forgetful and foggy.

4 PARKER - G Major Bolden testified that in response to the injury report, he sent a letter to the maintenance department to check the wires on the spotlight. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE The claimant reported that she had been shocked in the left hand and was taken to the infirmary and then transported to the emergency room (ER). There are photographs of the claimant s left hand and the spotlight, although I am unable to see any burn to the claimant s hand. The incident report shows the cause of the injury as exposed electrical. A follow-up witness statement from Mr. S. Ward reads: The light in East Tower had a wire that was cut. The connector had come off allowing the wire to wear through and touch the light housing. The wire was repaired and the connector re-attached. Everything is working well now. MEDICAL EVIDENCE In 2010, the claimant was treated by Doctors Walker and Rhodes for left cubital tunnel syndrome. She returned in April, 2013, with bilateral thumb and long finger pain. Dr. Rhodes performed surgery for bilateral thumb carpometacarpal arthritis. She was treated through December, After the incident at work in May, 2011, the claimant was taken to the ER. PT brought in via coworker to ER for electrical shock at work, Pt is lethargic, states that she is nauseated and dizzy, also c/o HQ. Pt states that she was shocked in the left hand, no burns noted... The claimant was given Tylenol for a headache and discharged. The claimant returned the next day complaining of difficulty speaking, stuttering, blurry vision, difficulty with balance, memory loss and headache. Skin: no trauma/burn/erythema/edema at site on left thumb

5 PARKER - G Differential Diagnosis: psychosomatic d/o, anxiety, HA, post-electric shock symptoms, cerebral edema. The claimant was again given Tylenol and referred to a neurologist. A form AR-3 signed by Dr. Lester Alexander shows the claimant was released on June 1, 2011, with no impairment or work restrictions. A follow-up CT scan of the brain showed no cerebral edema and the claimant s physical examination with Dr. Rutherford was normal. The claimant sought help at Southeast Arkansas Behavioral Healthcare System in December, 2011, for depression, anxiety, and memory loss which she attributed to the incident at work. She described financial problems due to her inability to work, panic attacks, and marital problems. She also shaved her head and wore a wig. A December 27, 2011, psychiatric evaluation shows the following diagnosis: AXIS I: Post Traumatic Stress Disorder major depression recurrent moderate panic disorder with agoraphobia AXIS II: Deferred AXIS III: Electricution (sic) in May, 2011 AXIS IV: Social environment, PPSG AXIS V: GA7 45 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The claimant attributes her psychological problems to an electrical shock she received while at work. In order to prove a compensable injury, the claimant has the burden of proving the elements listed in Ark. Code Ann by a preponderance of the evidence of record. A mental injury or illness is not a compensable injury unless it is caused by physical injury to the employee s body... this physical injury limitation shall not apply to any victim of a crime of violence.

6 PARKER - G No mental injury or illness... shall be compensable unless it is also diagnosed by a licensed psychiatrist or psychologist (based on) the most current issue of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. A compensable mental injury or illness entitles the claimant to 26 weeks of disability benefits. Based on the medical records, there is no evidence of any external or internal injury. Her physicians found no burn marks, the neurological examination was normal, and the diagnostic testing of her brain was normal. Therefore, I find the claimant has not met her burden of proof. 1. The Workers Compensation Commission has jurisdiction of this claim in which the employee-employer-carrier relationship existed on May 13, 2011, at which time the claimant was earning sufficient wages to be entitled to a compensation rate of $363.00/$ in the event this claim is found to be compensable. Some medical expenses were paid before this claim was controverted. 2. The claimant has failed to prove by a preponderance of the credible evidence that she sustained a compensable injury, caused by a specific incident, arising out of and in the course of her employment which produced physical bodily harm, supported by objective findings, requiring medical treatment or producing disability, pursuant to Ark. Code Ann If they have not already done so, the respondents are directed to pay the court reporter, Celia Jamison s, fees and expenses within thirty (30) days of receipt of the bill. This claim is respectfully denied and dismissed. IT IS SO ORDERED. ELIZABETH W. HOGAN Administrative Law Judge