The Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board has affirmed a trial court’s decision denying permanent disability benefits to an employee injured after a stack of chairs fell on her at work, while simultaneously confirming the employer must continue to pay for future necessary medical care. The case, brought by Saeeda Johnson against Aimbridge Hospitality, LLC, highlights the strict procedural requirements for appealing workers’ compensation rulings, especially when the appellate record is incomplete.
The Initial Incident and Conflicting Treatments
Saeeda Johnson, working as a banquet server for Aimbridge Hospitality, LLC, reported injuries on April 24, 2023, when chairs allegedly fell on her. While the employer accepted the compensability of the accident regarding her right arm, the ensuing medical journey was complicated.
Johnson initially sought unauthorized care at a CVS Minute Clinic, where the nurse practitioner noted her complaints but was told by Johnson that it wasn’t a workers’ compensation claim. The same day, she received authorized care at Fort Sanders Regional Medical Center, where X-rays confirmed contusions to her right wrist and elbow, along with neck pain.
The situation became more complex when Johnson reported being in a separate motor vehicle accident just days later, leading to complaints regarding her low back, right hand, right knee, and chest. She later returned to the ER complaining of hip and abdominal pain, referencing both the work injury and the car crash, before leaving against medical advice.
Authorized Care and Disputes Over Scope
The employer authorized treatment with Dr. John R. Blake, who initially addressed complaints related to the low back, right wrist, and abdomen, restricting Johnson from using her right hand. However, Dr. Blake later noted that the employer requested he limit treatment specifically to the right wrist injury, which they had accepted as compensable. Following a few physical therapy sessions, Dr. Blake released Johnson to return to work without restrictions, stating “no impairment/disability anticipated.”
Johnson did not return to work and filed for temporary disability and medical benefits. An initial hearing resulted in the trial court awarding her temporary disability benefits for a period when Dr. Blake had imposed restrictions, but the court found insufficient evidence that her other claimed conditions (back, pelvis, abdomen) were work-related.
When Dr. Blake stopped treating workers’ compensation patients, Johnson selected a new doctor, Dr. Joshua Moss. Dr. Moss diagnosed carpal tunnel syndrome in her right wrist, deemed it work-related, and administered a corticosteroid injection, imposing a temporary restriction of no more than five pounds of lifting with the right hand for six weeks.
Denial of Further Temporary Benefits and Final Hearing
Johnson later sought another round of temporary disability benefits based on Dr. Moss’s restrictions. However, the trial court denied this request, noting testimony that the employer could have accommodated those restrictions with alternative duties had Johnson not already resigned from her position in June 2023.
After this denial, Johnson’s medical engagement waned. She missed an appointment, declined a second injection or surgery when offered by Dr. Moss, and ultimately refused to undergo a Functional Capacity Evaluation (FCE) that Dr. Moss suggested if she declined further treatment.
At the final compensation hearing, the employer conceded the initial injury was compensable and agreed to cover future reasonable and necessary medical treatment. However, the employer argued, and the trial court agreed, that Johnson failed to submit evidence proving any *permanent* impairment, thus denying permanent disability benefits.
The Flawed Appeal
Johnson appealed the final ruling, raising various concerns in her notice and brief, including allegations about communication issues, lack of clarity regarding “lifetime benefits,” penalty charges, and dissatisfaction with Dr. Moss.
The Appeals Board, however, found itself unable to review the merits of her claims. The Board noted several critical procedural failings:
1. Post-Hearing Evidence: Johnson referenced documents and accusations filed *after* the trial court issued its final compensation order. The Appeals Board cannot consider evidence that was never entered into the record or reviewed by the trial court.
2. Missing Transcript: Crucially, no transcript of the compensation hearing was filed for the appeal. Without a transcript, the Appeals Board cannot know what evidence was actually presented to determine if the trial court’s decision was supported by the facts presented.
3. Lack of Argument: Johnson’s brief offered no coherent legal argument supporting her contention that the trial court erred. The Board emphasized that it is not the court’s role to research or construct a litigant’s case.
Because the appellate record was incomplete and the appeal lacked proper briefing, the Board concluded it must presume the evidence supported the trial court’s factual findings. Therefore, the decision to deny permanent disability benefits but award future medical care was affirmed and certified as final.