Help

BI’s Article search uses Boolean search capabilities. If you are not familiar with these principles, here are some quick tips.

To search specifically for more than one word, put the search term in quotation marks. For example, “workers compensation”. This will limit your search to that combination of words.

To search for a combination of terms, use quotations and the & symbol. For example, “hurricane” & “loss”.

Login Register Subscribe

Employer cannot compel second medical evaluation: Tennessee ruling

Reprints
Employer cannot compel second medical evaluation: Tennessee ruling

KNOXVILLE, Tenn.—An employer cannot compel a workers compensation claimant to undergo a second independent medical evaluation, a Tennessee Supreme Court Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel ruled Tuesday.

The finding in Sterling Edward Hubbard vs. Sherman-Dixie Concrete Industries Inc. upholds a trial court ruling that awarded the truck driver workers comp benefits.

In September 2006, Mr. Hubbard arrived at work before daylight and tripped over boxes, landing on a knee and twisting his back, court records show. He was treated at a hospital and released, but was unable to get out of bed for work the next morning and was subsequently treated by various doctors.

In 2009, he filed a “suit for workers compensation benefits,” according to a court opinion. He claimed permanent and total disability, but before trial his employer asked him to submit to two independent medical evaluations.

One doctor examined him, but Mr. Hubbard declined the second evaluation. The trial court eventually found he suffered a total permanent disability.

On appeal, the employer argued that the trial court abused its discretion by denying a motion to compel Mr. Hubbard to undergo the second medical evaluation.

But the appeals panel agreed with the trial court, which said the claimant had already seen several doctors whose medical records were available to the employer and that another exam was unlikely to reveal new information.

The appeals panel also disagreed that that the trial court erroneously concluded that Mr. Hubbard's injury was not an aggravation of a pre-existing injury.

“The evidence does not preponderate against the trial court's determination that the employee suffered permanent and total disability as a result of the 2006 injury and that the employer is fully responsible for the award of benefits,” the appeals panel said.

It also held the employer responsible for costs of the appeal.