{"id":"alj-H003228-2023-11-07","awcc_number":"H003228","decision_date":"2023-11-07","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Kimberly Parker","employer_name":"Nidec Motor Corp","title":"PARKER VS. NIDEC MOTOR CORP. AWCC# H003228 NOVEMBER 7, 2023","outcome":"denied","outcome_keywords":["granted:2","denied:6"],"injury_keywords":["shoulder","neck","cervical","back","rotator cuff"],"pdf_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/PARKER_KIMBERLY_H003228_20231107.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"PARKER_KIMBERLY_H003228_20231107.pdf","text_length":29997,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION \n \n WCC NO. H003228 \n \nKIMBERLY PARKER, Employee CLAIMANT \n \nNIDEC MOTOR CORP., Employer RESPONDENT \n \nTRAVELERS INDEMNITY CO., Carrier RESPONDENT \n \n \n \n OPINION FILED NOVEMBER 7, 2023 \n \nHearing  before  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW  JUDGE  ERIC  PAUL  WELLS  in  Fort  Smith, \nSebastian County, Arkansas. \n \nClaimant represented by DAVID L. SCHNEIDER, Attorney at Law, Fayetteville, Arkansas. \n \nRespondents represented by GUY ALTON WADE, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas. \n \n STATEMENT OF THE CASE \n \n On  August  10,  2023,  the  above  captioned  claim  came  on  for  a  hearing  at  Fort  Smith, \nArkansas.    A  pre-hearing  conference  was  conducted  on  May  8,  2023,  and  a  Pre-hearing  Order \nwas  filed  on  May  9,  2023.      A  copy  of  the  Pre-hearing  Order  has  been  marked  Commission's \nExhibit No. 1 and made a part of the record without objection. \n At the pre-hearing conference the parties agreed to the following stipulations: \n 1. The Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission has jurisdiction of this claim. \n 2. The relationship of employee-employer-carrier existed between the parties on October \n2, 2019. \n 3.  The  claimant  sustained  a  compensable  right  shoulder  injury  on  or  about  October  2, \n2019. \n 4.  The  respondents  have  controverted  the  claimant’s  alleged  neck  injury  on  or  about \nOctober 2, 2019. \n\nParker – H003228 \n \n-2- \n 5. The claimant was earning sufficient wages to entitle her to compensation at the weekly \nrates  of  $571.00  for  temporary  total  disability  benefits  and  $428.00  for  permanent  partial \ndisability benefits. \n By agreement of the parties the issues to litigate are limited to the following: \n 1. Whether Claimant sustained a compensable injury to her neck on or about October 2, \n2019. \n 2. Whether Claimant is entitled to medical treatment for her neck injury as recommended \nby Dr. Garlow. \n 3. Whether Claimant is entitled to additional medical treatment for her shoulder injury. \n 4.  Whether  Claimant  is  entitled  to  reimbursement  for  out-of-pocket  medical  expenses \nregarding both her neck and right shoulder injuries. \n 5.  Whether  Claimant  is  entitled  for  temporary  total  disability  benefits  from  March  3, \n2021, to a date yet to be determined. \n 6. Whether Claimant’s attorney is entitled to an attorney fee. \n Claimant’s contentions are: \n“Claimant sustained an admittedly compensable injury to her right \nshoulder while working for Respondent on or about 10/02/19 while \nlifting a heavy coil. At the time of the injury, Claimant was acting \nin  the  course  and  scope  of  her  employment  with  respondent.  The \nClaimant   also   contends   that   in   the   same   lifting   accident   on \n10/02/19  when  she  sustained  her  right  shoulder  injury,  she  also \nsuffered   an   injury   to   her   neck.   Respondents   have   provided \nClaimant  certain  medical  benefits,  including  injections,  therapy, \nmedications,  and  surgery.  Because  Claimant  continued  to  suffer \npain  in  her  right  shoulder  and  neck,  she  requested  an  obtained  a \nchange of physician to Dr. Garlow on 5/10/21. When the Claimant \nsaw Dr. Garlow pursuant to that change, he performed an injection \ninto her right shoulder. Dr. Garlow also indicated some of her pain \nand  related  symptoms  were  coming  from  her  neck.  An  MRI  and \nphysical  therapy  for  her  neck  was  recommended  by  Dr.  Garlow, \n\nParker – H003228 \n \n-3- \nbut was denied by the Respondents. Dr. Fortner, another physician \nseen by the Claimant, issued work restrictions on March 3, 2021. \n \nSince  that  time,  Respondents  have  not  offered  the  Claimant  a \nreturn  to  work  or  tendered  TTD  benefits.  Claimant  recently  saw \nDr.  Garlow  at  her  own  expense.  He  directed  her  to  undergo  a \ncervical   MRI   and   referred   her   to   physical   therapy   and   a \nneurosurgical  consult.  The  respondents  should  be  found  liable  for \nall medical  expenses  arising from Dr. Garlow and his referrals, as \nwell  as  any  other  medical  care  she  had  received  from  other \nauthorized physicians.” \n \n Respondents’ contentions are: \n \n“Respondents   contend   that   the   claimant   did   not   sustain   a \ncompensable   injury   to   her   neck   in   the   course   and   scope   of \nemployment.  Claimant  was  provided  work  within  any  restrictions \nrelated   to   her   compensable   shoulder   injury.   Claimant’s   neck \ncomplaints are not work related and instead are the result of a pre-\nexisting    condition(s)    for    which    the    respondents    are    not \nresponsible.” \n \n The  claimant  in  this  matter  is  a  51-year-old  female  who  sustained  an  admittedly \ncompensable  right  shoulder  injury  on  October  2,  2019.  The  claimant  was  employed  by  the \nrespondent to test electrical coils and then while seated, move the electrical coils from a testing \narea  in  front  of  her  to  a  table  behind  her.  In  her  direct  examination  testimony,  the claimant \ndescribes  her  work  on  October  2,  2019,  when  she  suffered  an  admittedly  compensable  right \nshoulder injury as follows: \nQ On that particular day, what kind of coils were you working \nwith? \n \nA The  large  ten-pound  coils.  I  would  test  like  four  and  then \npick  those  four  up,  which  would  be  about  40  pounds,  and  move \nthem  to  the  table  behind  me  which  would  go  over  my  head  or  to \nthe table to the left if they were bad. \n \nQ Did you remain seated the entire time? \n \nA Yes, sir. \n \n\nParker – H003228 \n \n-4- \nQ So what movement did you make? \n \nA You  pick  them  up,  raise  them  above  your  head,  slightly \nturn and set them down. \n \nQ And  were  these  coils  on  some  kind  of  a  tray  or  a  crate  or \nsomething when you pick them up? \n \nA A  table  like  you  are  sitting  in  front  of.  There  was  a  table \nthere, a table to the left, and a table behind. \n \nQ So there is a table – \n \nA To the left. \n \nQ --   that   is   roughly   about   like   four   feet   by   three   feet, \nsomething like that, five feet? \n \nA Yes, sir. \n \nQ And what kind of container were the coils in? \n \nA They were just laying on top of the table. \n \nQ Okay. \n \nA They  just  sat  on  the  table.  You  hooked  them  up  with \nelectrical, electrodes,  and then you would pick them up and move \nthem to the tables. \n \nQ So  you  said  you  were  moving  four.  How  did  you  pick  up \nfour coils? \n \nA I grab them with my hand and pick them up and go like this \nbehind  me  (indicating),  and  they  were  40  pounds  and  they  went \nover.  And  that  is  how  I  got  hurt.  It  popped  my  neck  and  my \nshoulder. \n \nQ And when you picked them up and moved them, what kind \nof motion did you make? Did your chair rotate? \n \nA Yes. Like I am sitting in now, I pick them up. I slightly turn \nto put them behind me (indicating). \n \nQ Now,  you  are  showing  us  a  reaching  motion  across  your \nbody? \n\nParker – H003228 \n \n-5- \n \nA Yes. You pick them up and over. \n \nQ So  you  had  your  hands  in  front  of  you.  You  picked  them \nup. \n \nA Pick them up. \n \nQ You swivel slightly. \n \nA And then you go over. \n \nQ Is that a motion in your shoulder? \n \nA To the table behind you, yes. \n \nQ So  you  picked  the  coils  up,  you  would  move  them  across \nyour body, and reach and set them on the table behind you? \n \nA Yes, sir. \n \n The  claimant  currently  alleges  that  she  also  sustained  a  compensable  neck  injury  at  the \ntime of her admittedly compensable right shoulder injury. The claimant gave direct examination \ntestimony about how she alleges her neck injury to have occurred as follows: \nQ Describe what happened. \n \nA I  reached  the  coils –  the  four  coils  in  front  were  ripe.  I \npicked  them  up.  I  slightly  turned.  I  went  to  put  them  over  behind \nme. They were heavier and they went past. They went past me and \npopped my shoulder and my neck (indicating). \n \nQ When  you  said  went  past  you,  you  are  showing  a  motion \nwhere you are reaching over your shoulder? \n \nA Yes. When I turned to put them on the table, they just kept \ngoing. \n \nQ What happened next? \n \nA I  got  ahold  of  my  supervisor.  He  came  over.  I  got  an  ice \npack. I got medicine. \n \nQ Let me back up just a little bit. \n\nParker – H003228 \n \n-6- \n \n When you put these particular coils over on this table, what \nsensations did you have? \n \nA I  had  a  burning,  a  numbing,  and  a  radiating  pain  down  to \nmy fingers. \n \nQ Did you hear any popping or cracking? \n \nA The pop of my neck and my shoulder, yes, sir. \n \nQ What physical sensations did you have at that time? \n \nA Like I said, there was a burning. There was a numbing. The \nradiating  pain  that  went  down  my  hand  from  my  elbow  to  my \nfingers. I had sharp, stabbing pains that would shoot from my neck \ndown to my shoulder to my elbow, just all the way down. \n \nQ What did you do after that? \n \nA I got ahold of my supervisor. \n \n It  was  the  claimant’s  testimony  that  she  was  provided  an  ice  pack  and  moved  to  a \nposition where she did not have to move or lift the electrical coils, only test them. The claimant \ndid not seek or request any medical treatment at that time. In fact, the claimant continued to work \nfor the respondent.  \n The  claimant  first  sought  medical  treatment  on  May  12,  2020,  some  223  days  after  the \nincident  she  described  in  direct  testimony.  The  claimant  was  seen  at  Mena  Regional  Health \nSystem by APRN Stacy Scott at that time. Following is a portion of that medical record: \nHPI: \nNew/Follow-up Patient Consult: \nJoint pain \nThe  joint  pain  Since  last  October.  Pt  was  at  work  and  lifted  coils \nthat was heavy and has had problems since. Pain getting worse. \nThe severity of the joint pain is variable \nThe character of the pain is sharp \nAggravating  factors  include  increased  exertion,  overuse,  recent \ninjury \nAlleviating factors include aleve, ibuprofen \n\nParker – H003228 \n \n-7- \nAssociated factors include joint pain, joint stiffness, muscle pain \n \nPt states she recalls moving a heavy coil on October 2\nnd\n and feeling \nimmediate  pain  in  her  right  shoulder.  She  states  it  has  hurt  since \nthat  time.  She  has  not  seen  anyone  for  this  injury.  She  states  she \nwas  off  work  for  2  weeks  due  to  COVID-19  precautions  and  she \ndidn’t have any shoulder pain during that time. Now that she has \nreturned to work, the pain has returned and is worsening. \n \nThe claimant was assessed with acute pain of the right shoulder and prescribed Meloxicam. \nThere  is  no  mention  in  the  medical  record  of  the  claimant’s  allegation  or  complaints  of  neck \ndifficulties. \n The  claimant  continued  to  treat  for  her  admittedly  compensable  right  shoulder  injury \nwithout mention of her alleged neck injury. On May 27, 2020, the claimant underwent an MRI of \nthe right shoulder. Following is a portion of that diagnostic report: \nIMPRESSION: \n1. Acromioclavicular joint degenerative joint disease as above with \nintraarticular  and  periarticular  inflammatory  changes  as  well  as \nsubarticular bone marrow edema. \n2.   Inferior   prominence   of   the   acromioclavicular   joint   which \ndeforms  the  superior  contour  of  the  distal  supraspinatus  tendon. \nCorrelate for possible impingement symptoms. \n \n After the claimant’s MRI of the right shoulder, she began to treat with Dr. Carl Cordell at \nCHI  St.  Vincent’s  in  Hot  Springs  on  June  11,  2020.  Following  is  a  portion  of  the  claimant’s \nmedical record from her June 11, 2020, visit: \nChief Complaint: \nPatient presents with \nShoulder pain – right \n \nHistory  of  Present  Illness:  Kimberly  F.  Parker  is  a  48  y.o.  right \nhand  dominant  female  here  for  evaluation  of  her  right  shoulder \npain.  The  patient  reports  pain  in  the  right  shoulder  for  9  months. \nThis  was  the  result  of  an  injury.  The  date  of  injury  was  10-2-19 \nwhile  lifting  coils  at  work  and  felt  shoulder  pop.  She  works  at \nNIDEC. The patient has not had previous surgery on the shoulder. \nThe pain is in the superior, anterior, lateral and posterior aspect of \n\nParker – H003228 \n \n-8- \nthe   shoulder.   The   patient   reports   pain   at   night.   The   pain   is \ndescribed  as  constant,  sharp,  aching,  stabbing  and  throbbing.  The \nintensity is 10/10. The patient does have weakness. The patient has \nswelling,  popping,  catching,  stiffness  and  instability.  The  patient \nhas not had physical therapy. The patient has taken medication for \nthe shoulder; ibuprofen, Mobic and Norco. The patient has not had \na steroid injection into the shoulder. The patient reports neck pain. \nThe  patient  reports  numbness  in  the  upper  extremity;  it  is  in  the \nright hand. The patient has had an MRI of the shoulder. The patient \ndoes have pain with ADLs. Pain is increased or provoked by using \narm. Pain is alleviated by not using arm. She is wearing a sling. \n \n*** \nNeck: Normal appearance/symmetry. \nCervical motion normal. \nSpurling’s test negative. \n \nFrom that record it is clear the claimant told Dr. Cordell about the incident on October 2, 2019, \nwhere  she “felt  shoulder  pop.”  There  is  only  silence  in  the  record  regarding  the  neck  pop  she \ntestified to have also occurred at the hearing in this matter.  \n The  claimant  continued  to  treat  conservatively  for  her  right  shoulder  with  Dr.  Cordell \nuntil  September  30,  2020,  when  she  underwent  surgical  intervention.  Following  is  a  portion  of \nDr. Cordell’s operative report: \nPre-operative Diagnosis: \n1. Right shoulder pain \n2. Right partial rotator cuff tear \n3. Right impingement syndrome \n4. Right RTC syndrome \n \nPost-operative Diagnosis: \n1. Right shoulder pain \n2. Right small partial rotator cuff tear \n3. Right impingement syndrome \n4. Right RTC tendinosis \n5. Right degenerative labral tear \n \nProcedure Performed: \n1. Right arthroscopic sub-acromial decompression \n2. Right debridement of the glenohumeral joint, extensive \n \n\nParker – H003228 \n \n-9- \n On  February  23,  2021,  the  claimant  had  her  final  postoperative  visit  with  Dr.  Cordell. \nFollowing is a portion of that medical record: \nCHIEF  COMPLAINT:  The  patient  is  here  for  the  final  post-op \nvisit  after  a  right  SAD  and  debridement.  The  date  of  surgery  was \n9-30-2020. \n \nSUBJECTIVE: Kimberly F. Parker is here for a final postoperative \nvisit  for  a  right  SAD  and  debridement.  The  patient  has  pain \nposteriorly  and  around  the  scapula.  The  patient  has  completed \nphase  III therapy. She has intermittent pain. This is medial border \nof scapula. \n \n*** \nASSESSMENT: \n1. Right shoulder pain \n2. Right small partial rotator cuff tear \n3. Right impingement syndrome \n4. Right RTC tendinosis \n5. Right degenerative labral tear \n \nTREATMENT   AND   PLAN:   The   patient   will   continue   home \nstrengthening  exercises.  Her  scapular  pain  may  be  related  to  c \nspine  pathology.  If  she  has  any  problems  or  concerns  with  her \nshoulder, she may return. She is at MMI with no impairment. \n \n On  March  3,  2021,  the  claimant  is  seen  by  APRN  Lori  Fortner  at  Mena  Medical \nAssociates. Following is a portion of that medical record: \nHistory of Present Illness \nNew/Follow-up Patient Consult: \nJoint pain \nThe joint pain October 2019 \nThe  joint  pain  is  located  in  the  right  side  of  the  neck,  in  the  right \nshoulder \nThe severity of the joint pain is severe \nThe character of the pain is sharp and numbness sensation \nAggravating  factors  include  increased  exertion,  overuse,  recent \ninjury recent surgery \nAlleviating factors include None \nAssociated factors include joint pain, joint stiffness, muscle pain \nMedication(s) for joint pain include narco Meloxicam, Oxycodone \nOverall condition is worsening \nWhere did injury occur work \n\nParker – H003228 \n \n-10- \n \nMs.  Parker  is  here  today  for  a  f/u  on  right  shoulder  pain.  She \ninitially  hurt  her  right  shoulder  at  work  by  trying  to  move  a  coil. \nShe was given Hydrocodone and Meloxicam for the pain. She was \nreferred  to  Dr.  Cordell  and  was  given  Oxycodone  10-325  #60  for \n15  days  and  was  last  filled  10/01/2020.  Hydrocodone  was  last \nfilled  05/28/2020  and  was  given  #28  for  7  days.  Ms.  Parker  had \nsurgery on the right shoulder on 09/2020 and was told that the pain \nmight be more in the neck that is radiating down into the shoulder. \nShe  went  to  PT  and  was  told  that  it  would  take  time  but  she  had \nnot had any improvement. \n \n*** \nAssessments \n1. Acute pain of right shoulder – M25.511 (Primary) \n2. Cervical pain (neck) – M54.2 \n3. Radicular pain in right arm – M79.2 \n \nTreatment \n1. Acute pain of right shoulder \nStart Meloxicam Tablet, 15 MG, Orally, Once a day, 30 day(s), 30, \nRefills 5 \nStart  Hydrocodone-Acetaminophen  Tablet,  7.5-325  MG,  1  tablet \nas needed, Orally, every 6 hrs prn severe pain, 7 days, 28 Tablets, \nRefills 0 \nStart Gabapentin Capsule, 100 MG, 1 capsule, Orally, Once a day, \n30 day(s), 90, Refills 5 \nIMAGING: MRI SHOULDER RIGHT \nNotes: \npmp reviewed \ner/urgent care prn \nfailure  to  improve  with  trigger  point  injection,  shoulder  surgery, \nnsaids, and physical therapy \nrecommend further radiographic diagnostics \nconsider EMG/NCS for nerve symptoms \nrtc in 2 weeks or sooner prn new/worsening symptoms \n \n2. Cervical pain (neck) \nIMAGING: SPINE/CERVICAL W FEX/EXT \nIMAGING: SPINE/CERVICAL AP & LAT \n \nThere is mention of neck pain in this medical report. However, the record still fails to reflect the \npop associated with her neck the claimant claims to have occurred on October 2, 2019. Just a few \ndays prior to the claimant’s March 3, 2021, visit  with APRN Fortner, the  claimant completed a \n\nParker – H003228 \n \n-11- \nForm  AR-N,  which  is  found  at  Respondent’s  Exhibit  2,  page  1.  That  AR-N  is  signed  by  the \nclaimant  and  dated  February  26,  2021.  That  form  only  indicates  a  right  shoulder  injury  on \nOctober  2,  2019.  This  form,  filled  out  and  signed  by  the  claimant  513  days  removed  from  her \nalleged neck injury, does not include any reference to claimant’s neck. \n On March 22, 2021, the claimant underwent a second MRI of the right shoulder at Mena \nRegional Health Systems. Following is a portion of that diagnostic report: \nIMPRESSION: \n1.    Acromioclavicular    joint    degenerative    joint    disease    with \nintraarticular inflammatory changes. \n2. Evidence of bursitis. \n \n The claimant saw Dr. Timothy Garlow at Mercy Clinic Orthopedic in Fort Smith on May \n10, 2021. Following is a portion of that clinic note: \nHISTORY  OF  PRESENT  ILLNESS:  The  patient  is  a  49-year-old \nfemale,  in  to  see  me  today  for  her  right  shoulder.  There  had  been \nan injury at work, for which she was treated by  Carl Cordell, MD \nin  Hot  Springs.  She  reports  that  she  failed  physical  therapy,  she \nfailed  injections.  She  had  an  MRI  showing  just  AC  joint  changes. \nShe  underwent  an  arthroscopic  procedure.  I  do  not  have  the  op \nnote,  though  it  sounds  like  she  had  a  SAD  and  a  DCR.  She  says \nsince that time, her motions maybe gotten better, though her pain is \nreally  the  same.  She  reports  a  lot  of  pain  into  the  trapezlua \nmuscuiature  in  between  the  shoulder  blades.  She  has  periodic \nnumbness  and  tingling  down  the  arm.  She  says  that  she  has \nnumbness  across  where  her  bra  strap  should  be  in  the  back.  She \nhas had an MRI after her surgery. \n \nThe  patient’s  past  medical,  surgical  history,  as  well  as  current \nmedications,  allergies,  family  history,  social  history,  review  of \nsystems, all reviewed and up-to-date in the patient questionnaire. \n \n*** \nASSESSMENT  AND  PLAN:  A  49-year-old  female,  failed  right \nshoulder  treatments  including  surgery,  injections,  therapy,  and \nanti-inflammatories. I think a lot of this is periscapular pain related \nto  her  underlying  cervical  issues.  We  are  going  to  work  this  up \nwith an MRI of her neck. I am going to start her on some physical \ntherapy  for  her  neck  as  well.  There  is  a  component  of  this,  has \n\nParker – H003228 \n \n-12- \nsome bursitis type symptoms. We are going to try an injection into \nthe shoulder. She consents to this under sterile conditions that right \nshoulder  injected  with  3  mL  of  lidocaine  and  10  mg  of  Kenalog \nand she tolerated that well. We will see her back. \n \n The claimant was again seen by Dr. Garlow on January 16, 2023. Following is a portion \nof that medical report: \nHISTORY  OF  PRESENT  ILLNESS:  Ms.  Parker  is  a  patient, \nwhom  I  have  not  seen  since  May  of  2021.  She  had  an  injury  at \nwork,  treated  in  Hot  Springs  with  Dr.  Carl  Cordell.  She  had  a \nscope procedure, sounds like this is a SAD and DCR. When I saw \nher  in  clinic,  I  had  seen  that  she  is  having  a  lot  of  cervical-type \nissues. We had tried to get an MRI of her neck, at that time we can \nget  her  started  on  some  therapy,  though  she  says  because  of  work \ncomp issues none of that ever happened. She is still having quite a \nbit of pain. Let us see what else can be done. \n \n*** \nIMAGING:  Updated  x-rays  of  the  cervical  spine  obtained  and \nreviewed  today.  She  has  phyte  formation  around  C5-C6  and  even \nsome  calcifications,  that  look  like  immature  bridging  osteophyte \nthere. I do not appreciate any fractures, acute or remote. No lesions \nin the soft tissue or bone. \n \nASSESSMENT   AND   PLAN:   A   50-year-old   female,   chronic \ncervical  pain  with  radiculopathy.  I  discussed  all  this  with  her  as \nwell  as  treatment  options.  I  think  she  would  benefit  from  some \nphysical  therapy  on  the  neck.  I  think  that  given  the  chronicity  of \nher  symptoms  now  the  development  of  radicular-type  symptoms \nthat  an  MRI  of  the  cervical  spine  also  makes  sense.  I  discussed \nwith her that ultimately I am not a spine surgeon, we may have to \nhand her off to somebody who handles neck injuries. \n \n On  February  3,  2023,  the  claimant  underwent  an  MRI  of  the  cervical  spine  at  Mercy \nHospital  Fort  Smith.  Following  is  a  portion  of  that  diagnostic  report  authored  by  Dr.  David \nDiment: \nIMPRESSION: \nMultilevel  mild  degenerative  change  as  above  with  small  left \nlateral  disc  protrusion  C5-6  with  left  foraminal  stenosis,  some \nposterior  lateral  uncinate  spurring  and  bulge  or  small  protrusions \n\nParker – H003228 \n \n-13- \nC6-7 slightly more then left with some foraminal stenosis more on \nthe left. No large disc herniation or canal stenosis. \n \n It is the claimant’s burden to prove that she sustained a compensable injury to her neck or \ncervical  spine  on  or  about  October  2,  2019.  The  claimant  can  establish  objective  medical \nfindings of derangement in her cervical spine through her February 3, 2023, cervical spine MRI. \nHowever,  the  claimant  must  also  prove  a  causal  connection  between  those  objective  medical \nfindings  and  the  October  2,  2019,  incident  when  she  alleges  her  neck “pop.”  The  claimant \ntestified  that  she  told  medical  providers  about  her  neck  difficulties  and  there  are  some  minimal \nmentions of neck pain, but as late as February 26, 2021, when the claimant completed and signed \na  Form  AR-N,  she  only  alleged  a  right  shoulder  injury.  The  remoteness  in  time  some  513  days \nafter  her  alleged  injury  and  still  the  claimant  does  not  claim  a  neck  injury  on  an “Employee \nNotice of Injury” form is remarkable. The claimant’s medical records never once make mention \nof the pop in her neck she testified at the hearing to have experienced on  October 2, 2019, even \nthough  medical  records  do  reference  the  pop  in  her  right  shoulder  on  October  2,  2019.  The \nclaimant  is  unable  to  prove  a  causal  connection  between  her  alleged  October  2,  2019,  neck \nincident and her objective findings of derangement in her cervical spine. As such, the claimant is \nunable to prove that she sustained a compensable neck injury on or about October 2, 2019. \n The  claimant  has  asked  the  Commission  to  determine  if  she  is  entitled  to  medical \ntreatment  for  her  neck.  As  the  claimant  has  failed  to  prove  her  neck  injury  compensable,  the \nclaimant is not entitled to medical treatment regarding her neck. \n The  claimant  has  asked  the  Commission  to  determine  if  she  is  entitled  to  additional \nmedical treatment for her compensable right shoulder injury. The  claimant last saw Dr.  Garlow \non  January  16,  2023.  At  that  time,  Dr.  Garlow  did  not  recommend  any  treatment  for  the \nclaimant’s right shoulder, but instead, he directed treatment for her neck. As Dr. Garlow did not \n\nParker – H003228 \n \n-14- \nrecommend any right shoulder treatment, the claimant is unable to prove her entitlement to any \nadditional right shoulder treatment. \n The  claimant  has  asked  the  Commission  to  determine  whether  she  is  entitled  to \nreimbursement  for  out-of-pocket  medical  expenses  regarding  her  neck  and  right  shoulder \ninjuries.  The  claimant  has  failed  to  prove  her  neck  injury  compensable.  As  such,  she  is  not \nentitled  to  any  medical  expenses.  It  appears  that  Dr.  Garlow’s  treatment  was  in  regard  to  the \nclaimant’s  neck,  not  particularly  her  right  shoulder.  It  is  the  claimant’s  burden  to  prove  her \nentitlement  to  any  reimbursement  for  medical  expenses  and  she  has  failed  to  do  so.  The \nclaimant’s last visit with Dr. Garlow recommended no treatment for her right shoulder, only her \nneck. \n The claimant has asked the Commission to determine if she is entitled to temporary total \ndisability benefits from March 3, 2021, to a date yet to be determined. On March 3, 2021, APRN \nFortner, who is not a medical doctor as  set out in the claimant’s contentions and testimony, did \nremove  the  claimant  from  full  duty  by  restricting  use  of  the  claimant’s  right  arm.  In  that \nrestricted  duty  note,  found  at  Claimant’s  Exhibit  1,  page  52,  under  the  Diagnosis  section,  it \nstates:  \nRight  shoulder  pain/radicular  pain  RUE  neck  vs  shoulder  pending \nreview  of  neck  x-ray  and  shoulder  MRI  to  determine  further \nlimitations. \n \nThe  claimant  then  had  a  right  shoulder  MRI  on  March  22,  2021,  of  which  the  results  did  not \nshow  the  claimant  to  have  reentered  a  healing  period  from  her  release  by  Dr.  Cordell  on \nFebruary  23,  2021.  In  fact,  treatment  then  begins  to  move to  the  claimant’s  neck,  which  she \nfailed  to  prove  to  be  compensable.  In  Dr.  Garlow’s  last  visit  with  the  claimant  on  January  16, \n2023,  he  does  not  recommend  any  treatment  for  the  claimant’s  compensable  right  shoulder \n\nParker – H003228 \n \n-15- \ninjury.  Instead,  he  recommends  treatment  for  the  claimant’s  neck  difficulties.  The  claimant  is \nunable  to  prove  her  entitlement  to  temporary  total  disability  benefits  from  March  3,  2021,  to  a \ndate  yet  to  be  determined,  as  the  claimant  was  not  in,  nor  did  she  reenter  her  healing  period  in \nregards to her compensable right shoulder injury. \n The  claimant  has  asked  the  Commission  to  determine  if  her  attorney  is  entitled  to  an \nattorney’s  fee  in  this  matter.  As  the  claimant  has  not  proven  her  entitlement  to  any  indemnity \nbenefits, the claimant’s attorney is not entitled to any attorney fee. \n From a review of the record as a whole, to include medical reports, documents, and other \nmatters properly before the Commission, and having had an opportunity to hear the testimony of \nthe witness and to observe her demeanor, the following findings of fact  and conclusions of law \nare made in accordance with A.C.A. §11-9-704: \n FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW \n 1.  The  stipulations  agreed  to  by  the  parties  at  the  pre-hearing  conference  conducted  on \nMay  8,  2023,  and  contained  in  a  Pre-hearing  Order  filed  May  9,  2023,  are  hereby  accepted  as \nfact. \n 2. The claimant has failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that she sustained \na compensable injury to her neck on or about October 2, 2019. \n 3. The claimant has failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence her entitlement to \nmedical treatment for her alleged neck injury. \n 4. The claimant has failed to prove her entitlement to additional medical treatment for her \ncompensable right shoulder injury. \n\nParker – H003228 \n \n-16- \n 5.  The  claimant  has  failed  to  prove  her  entitlement to  reimbursement  for  out-of-pocket \nmedical  expenses  regarding  both  her  alleged  neck  injury  and  her  admittedly  compensable  right \nshoulder injury. \n 6. The claimant has failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that she is entitled \nto temporary total disability benefits from March 3, 2021, to a date yet to be determined. \n 7. The claimant has failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that her attorney \nis entitled to an attorney’s fee. \n ORDER \nIf  they  have  not  already  done  so,  the  respondents  are  directed  to  pay  the  court  reporter, \nVeronica Lane, fees and expenses within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice. \nPursuant  to  the  above  findings  and  conclusions,  I  have  no  alternative  but  to  deny  this \nclaim in its entirety. \nIT IS SO ORDERED. \n                                ____________________________                                              \n       HONORABLE ERIC PAUL WELLS \n       ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. H003228 KIMBERLY PARKER, Employee CLAIMANT NIDEC MOTOR CORP., Employer RESPONDENT TRAVELERS INDEMNITY CO., Carrier RESPONDENT OPINION FILED NOVEMBER 7, 2023 Hearing before ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE ERIC PAUL WELLS in Fort Smith, Sebastian County, Arkansas. Cla...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T23:00:12.909Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H003228-2023-11-07","pdf":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/PARKER_KIMBERLY_H003228_20231107.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}