{"id":"alj-H301023-2024-05-06","awcc_number":"H301023","decision_date":"2024-05-06","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Willie Battles","employer_name":null,"title":"BATTLES VS. ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRRECTIONAWCC# H301023 May 6, 2024","outcome":"granted","outcome_keywords":["granted:4"],"injury_keywords":["back","shoulder","hip","rotator cuff","wrist","fracture","lumbar","strain"],"pdf_url":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/BATTLES_WILLIE_H301023_20240506.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"BATTLES_WILLIE_H301023_20240506.pdf","text_length":46720,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’COMPENSATION COMMISSION \n \nCLAIM NO.: H301023 \n \n \nWILLIE MAE BATTLES, EMPLOYEE                                                               CLAIMANT \n \nARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRRECTION/ \n(BENTON WORK RELEASE CENTER), EMPLOYER                               RESPONDENT                             \n   \nPUBLIC EMPLOYEE CLAIMS DIVISION, \nINSURANCE CARRIER/TPA                                                                          RESPONDENT    \n                               \n \nOPINION FILED MAY 6, 2024    \n \nA hearing was held before Administrative Law Judge Chandra L. Black, in Little Rock, Pulaski \nCounty, Arkansas. \n \nClaimant  represented by the  Honorable  William  C.  Frye, Attorney  at  Law, North Little  Rock, \nArkansas.       \n \nRespondents represented by Honorable Robert H. Montgomery, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, \nArkansas. \n \nSTATEMENT OF THE CASE \n \nA  hearing  was  held  in  the  above-styled  claim  on February  6, 2024, in Little  Rock, \nArkansas.  A prehearing telephone conference was held on this matter on November 15, 2023.  A \nprehearing order was entered into this matter on that same day.  This prehearing order set forth the \nstipulations offered by the parties, their contentions, and the issues to be litigated.  \nStipulations \nThe parties submitted the following stipulations, either per the prehearing order, or at the \nstart of the hearing.  I hereby accept the following stipulations as fact: \n1. The Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission has jurisdiction of the within \nclaim. \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n2 \n \n2. The employee-employer-insurance carrier existed on January 29, 2023, when the \nClaimant sustained compensable injuries to her right hand, back, right shoulder and  \nright hip. \n3. That the Claimant’s average weekly wage on January 29 was $1,093.52, yielding \nweekly compensation    rates    of    $729.00    for    temporary    total disability \ncompensation, and $547.00 for permanent partial disability benefits.  \n4. The Respondents have controverted this claim for additional benefits in its entirety. \n \n5. All issues not litigated here are reserved under the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation   \n \nAct. \n \nIssues \n By agreement of the parties, the issues to be litigated at the hearing are as follows:  \n1. Whether the Claimant is entitled to additional medical treatment for her injuries. \n2. Whether the Claimant is entitled to temporary total disability (TTD) compensation \nfrom May 2023 until a date yet to be decided. \n3. Whether the Claimant’s attorney is entitled to a controverted attorney’s fee.   \n \nContentions \n The parties’ respective contentions are outlined below: \nClaimant: \nThe Claimant fell and injured her hand, back, and shoulder.  She was treated by Dr. Thomas \nwho referred the Claimant to Dr. Bowen who took her off work.  Dr. Thomas then referred her to \nDr. Kevin Collins who does not take workers’ compensation patients and the Claimant is going \nback to her authorized treating medical doctor, Dr. Thomas, and will see him on October 25, 2023, \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n3 \n \nfor her low back and referral for her torn rotator cuff.  The Claimant was terminated on August 13, \n2023, due to her restrictions and inability to do the essential functions of the job.      \nRespondents:  \n The Claimant alleges she injured her right hand, her right shoulder and right hip as a result \nof tripping and falling on or about January 29, 2023.  The Claimant received medical treatment for \nher hand  by  Jenna  Pardoe,  PA-C, at  OrthoArkansas.  The  Claimant  was  seen  for  her  hip  and \nshoulder injuries by Dr. Victor Vargas at OrthoArkansas.  The Claimant was found to be at MMI \nfor her hip and shoulder injuries by Dr. Vargas on April 3, 2023.  The Claimant was found to be \nat MMI for her hand injury on April 10, 2023, by Ms. Pardoe.  The Claimant was released to return \nto full duty work. \n The Claimant received all appropriate medical treatment for her reported injuries.  She was \npaid  TTD  benefits  beyond  her  MMI  date(s), and  the  Respondents  are  entitled  to  a  credit  in  the \namount of $1,353.82.  The Claimant has reached maximum medical improvement for her injuries \nand has received all appropriate benefits to which she might be entitled.    \n If  it  is  determined  that  the  Claimant  is  entitled  to  any  benefits,  the  Respondents  hereby \nrequest an offset for any benefits paid by the Claimant’s group health carrier, any short-term \ndisability  benefits  received  by  the  Claimant,  any  long-term  disability benefits  received  by  the \nClaimant, and any unemployment benefits received by the Claimant.  Respondents contend that it \nwould be entitled to credit pursuant to A.C.A. §11-9-411 against any additional indemnity benefits \nthat may be awarded to the Claimant.  \n The Respondents reserve the right to offer additional contentions, or to modify those stated \nherein, pending the completion of discovery.    \n \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n4 \n \n             FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW \nBased on my review of the record as a whole, to include the aforementioned documentary \nevidence, other matters properly before the Commission, and after having had an opportunity to \nhear  the  testimony  of  the  witnesses and  observe their demeanor,  I  hereby  make  the  following \nfindings  of  fact  and  conclusions  of  law  in  accordance  with  Ark.  Code  Ann.  §11-9-704  (Repl. \n2012): \n1.    The Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission has jurisdiction over this claim. \n2.     I hereby accept the above-mentioned proposed stipulations as fact. \n \n   3.    The Claimant proved by a preponderance of credible evidence that all the authorized \nmedical  treatment  of  record  by  Dr.  Bowen  and  Rhodes  was  reasonably  necessary  for  her \ncompensable injuries of January 29, 2023.  I also find that the recommended surgery by Dr. Rhodes \nfor her right arm/hand injury is reasonably necessary in connection with the injury received by the \nClaimant in January 2023. \n4.    The Claimant proved her entitled to temporary total disability compensation from May \n2023  until  a  date  yet  to  be decided, such  as until the  pronouncement  of  maximum  medical \nimprovement by Dr. Rhodes following her surgery. \n           5.   The Claimant’s attorney is entitled to a controverted attorney’s fee on the indemnity \nbenefits awarded in this opinion. \n          6.    All issues not litigated herein are reserved under the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation \nAct.          \nSummary of Evidence \nMs. Willie Mae Battles (referred to herein as the “Claimant”), was the only witness to \ntestify on her behalf during the hearing.  \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n5 \n \nMs. Nichole L. Metott was the sole witness to testify on behalf of the Respondents. \n            The record consists of the February 6, 2024 hearing transcript and the following exhibits: \nSpecifically, Commission’s Exhibit 1 comprises the Commission’s Prehearing Order filed on  \nNovember  15,  2023, along  with the  parties’  responsive  filings;  Claimant’s  Medical  Exhibit \nconsisting   of fifty-five (55) pages   was   marked as Claimant’s  Exhibit  1; Respondents’ \nDocumentary Exhibit consisting of twenty-three (23) pages was marked as Respondents’ Exhibit \n1;  Respondents’ Medical  Exhibit  includes thirty-two(32) pages and  it has  been  marked  as \nRespondents’ Exhibit 2; and the Oral Deposition of Willie Mae Battles taken on November 7, 2023 \nhas been marked as Respondents’ Exhibit 3.  It has been blue-backed and made a part of the record. \nProcedural Background \nWillie Mae Battles/the Claimant  \nAt the time of the hearing, Ms. Battles was 63 years old.  She has a 12\nth\n grade education.  \nHer  deposition  testimony  shows  that  she  previously  worked  at  a  nursing  home,  Holiday  Inn, \nKentucky Fried Chicken and then she went to work for Alexander Human Development Center.  \nThe  Claimant  worked  there  from  1985  until  2001,  and  then  she  quit  working  for  a  while.    Ms. \nBattles returned to work for the Arkansas Department of Correction/ADC in 2006 as a correctional \nofficer at the Wrightsville Unit.  The Claimant specifically testified that from 2006 until 2015, she \nworked  as  a  medical security officer at  the  ADC  hospital.  She  left  there  in  2015.    Ms.  Battles \nreturned to work for ADC in July 2021, and began working at the Benton Work Release Center.  \nAccording to Ms. Battles, she worked  for the State of Arkansas for a total of approximately 35 \nyears.    \nRegarding  her employment duties  at  the Benton  Work  Release  Center,  as  a  correctional \nofficer, Ms. Battles explained: \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n6 \n \nA I did confiscation, looking for contraband, and I used to monitor them and go and \ncheck on ‘em every -- every hour.  I was having to have to climb stairs every hour.  Just \ngoing  to  the  gun  range – well,  we  did  that  once  a  yar,  and  just  pretty  much,  you  know, \neverything that correction officers do and checking the contraband mostly. \nQ  Are you required to be 100% for that job? \nA  I am required to be 100%. \nMs. Battles confirmed that on August 15, 2023, they ended her employment with ADC, as \na correctional officer at the Benton Work Release Center.  The reason given for her termination \namounted to her inability to perform the essential employment duties for her job as a correctional \nofficer.   The Claimant specifically testified that  she  did  not get  proper medical documentation \nsaying that she was able to return to work.   \n Regarding her work-related injury, the Claimant confirmed that the date of her accidental \ninjury  was  January  29,  2023.   Ms.  Battles gave  the following description  of how her  injury \nhappened: “I had clocked in, and I was heading to my post, and I end up tripping over some uneven \nsidewalk and fell on my hand, which I end up rolling over to my right side.” \n Ms. Battles testified that she injured her hands, but the primary injury was to the top of her \nright hand.  She also injured her shoulder, hip and back.  The Claimant testified that she has tingling \nand numbness in her hand and arm.  Ms. Battles also testified that she is unable to raise her arm to \nher ear due to her shoulder.  Per Ms. Battles, she has been told she will have to undergo rotator \ncuff  repair surgery.  According  to  the  Claimant,  her  pain  is  located  around  the  ball  area  of  her \nshoulder.  Her hip hurts on the right side.  Per the Claimant, although she can walk, it takes her \nmuch longer to do everything.  Ms. Battles confirmed that she occasionally uses a cane to walk.  \nThe Claimant testified that if she takes a lot of medicine, she can walk but just slowly.  \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n7 \n \n As of the date of the hearing, the Claimant stated that she must take Ibuprofen every day \nto be able to “just do.”  She confirmed that she sought medical treatment for her hand from Jenna \nPardoe,  who  is  an  APN.  Pardoe  ordered  physical  therapy,  but  she  ended  up  stopping the \nClaimant’s medical treatment.   Ms.  Battles testified  that  she  has  problems  with  her  day-to-day \nactivities due to her shoulder, arm, back, and hip injuries.  She testified that she is unable to do any \ncooking.  Per the Claimant, her granddaughter must help her with that task.  Ms. Battles confirmed \nthat  she  told  Pardoe  she  had  stiffness in  her hand,  wrist,  and  elbow.    However,  the  Claimant \ntestified that the focus of Pardoe’s medical treatment was geared toward her hand.  Pardoe also \nnoted that the Claimant had a contusion on her hand.   According to the Claimant, she was referred \nto Dr. Vargas for her shoulder.  \n Ms. Battles confirmed that she received physical  therapy at the Markham Injury Center.  \nAccording to the Claimant, Public Employee Claims paid for some of her therapy.  The other part \nof the bill is still outstanding.  She was released by Dr. Vargas after the physical therapy sessions \nended.  The Claimant confirmed that Dr. Vargas recommended that she use a cane due to her hip \nissues.          \n Regarding Ms. Battles’ job  duties,  her attorney asked  if  she could do  her  job  at  the \nDepartment of Correction, given her use of a cane, she replied, “Absolutely not.”  Specifically, the \nClaimant testified: \n Q Tell Judge Black why you cannot do your job with a cane. \n A I had 39 steps to climb every hour and there’s no way.  And the inmates seeing’ me \nwith a cane, it would’ve been difficult for - - you know, they can try to, you know, jump \non me or anything with a cane.  \n Q So you couldn’t do the essential functions of the job.  Is that a fair statement? \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n8 \n \n A That’s fair. \n Ms. Battles confirmed that she was taken off work on April 12 by Dr. Moore.  Per a work \nnote,  the Claimant  was  taken  off  work  due  to  right  shoulder  pain  and a contusion.  Ms.  Battles \nconfirmed that Dr. Moore had sent her to Dr. Bowen for further evaluation.   \nUnder further questioning, the Claimant confirmed that she underwent evaluation by Dr. \nBowen  on  April  25,  2023.    He  did  x-rays  of the Claimant’s back, shoulder, arm, and hip.  The \nClaimant confirmed that Dr. Bowen reported that she has an antalgic gait.  Dr. Bowen ordered an \nMRI of her right shoulder.  On April 25, 2023, Dr. Bowen gave Ms. Battles a letter saying she \ncould return to work on July 3, 2023.   Her restrictions included sedentary work of no lifting of the \nright  upper  extremity.    However,  the  Claimant denied  that  she  would  be  able  to  work  for  the \nDepartment  of  Correction  with  these  light-duty  restrictions.    The  Claimant  admitted  that  Dr. \nBowen is an orthopedic surgeon.  She confirmed that Dr. Bowen showed that she had a torn rotator \ncuff in her right shoulder.  Although Dr. Bowen referred the Claimant to Dr. Collins, she testified \nthat they told her she was not a candidate.  However, Ms. Battles did not explain this statement.  \nShe confirmed that on May 16, 2023, Dr. Bowen told her to remain off work until her appointment \nwith Dr. Collins.  The Claimant confirmed that Dr. Bowen ordered long-term physical therapy.  \nDr.  Vargas  saw  the  Claimant  on  May  22,  2023.    At  that  time,  Dr.  Vargas  instructed  the \nClaimant to refrain from walking for an extended period.  He also told that the Claimant could not \nclimb up and down ladders.  Dr. Vargas also opined that the Claimant did not have the ability to \nrespond to an emergency or carry an inmate.  She confirmed that on May 25, 2023, Dr. Vargas \nsaid that she could not do all the above things, but changed everything to say she could do those \nthings  the  next  day  after  her  job  called them.    The  Claimant  confirmed  that  there  was  no  new \nphysical examination, and her pain had not changed.  Nor had the Claimant’s overall condition \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n9 \n \nchanged.  She agreed that Dr. Vargas’s recommendation was contrary to what Dr. Bowen had \nrecommended.             \nThe Claimant saw Dr. Brad Thomas on June 7, 2023, per a change of physician order.  He \nreferred the Claimant to Dr. Bowen for her back.  The Claimant saw Dr. Bowen on June 22, 2023.  \nAt that time, Dr. Bowen noted that he had referred the Claimant to Dr. Collins for her back, but \nthis did not go through because he does not take workers’ compensation patients.  Dr. Bowen also \nsaid in his report that the Claimant had made some progress with her shoulder while taking part in \nphysical therapy.  Dr. Bowen opined on June 22 that the Claimant could not do any of the functions \nof her job.   \nOn  November  2,  2023,  the  Claimant  returned  to  Dr.  Bowen,  and  he  discussed  the \npossibility of her undergoing an injection in her shoulder.  The Claimant confirmed that she had \none injection in her shoulder.  Dr. Bowen wanted to switch her physical therapy to see if it could \nhelp her shoulder, back and hip.  The Claimant was under active medical treatment with Dr. Bowen \nfrom May until November.  Her medical treatment included physical therapy, diagnostic studies, \nand he referred her to Dr. Rhodes, who is in the same clinic.  Dr. Bowen reported that the Claimant \ncontinued to have weakness in her right upper extremity, which had gotten worse over the last two \nmonths.  The Claimant testified that she has a frozen shoulder, and as a result, Dr. Bowen referred \nher  for  surgery  on  her  hand.  Ms.  Battles  denied  having  undergone  this  treatment.    Dr.  Bowen \nspecifically mentions   in   his progress report   that   the   Claimant   has “a   right   ulnar   nerve \ndecompression at the wrist, but it is in fact it is really in her elbow.”   \nThe Claimant confirmed that she started physical therapy again and it helped a little bit.  \nRegarding her current symptoms, the Claimant was asked about her right arm, which is below the \nshoulder on the right side.  Specfifically, Ms. Battles testified that she has numbness, tingling and \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n10 \n \nburning in her fingers.  The Claimant testified that her shoulder pain is a throbbing-excruciating \npain, and she has difficulties raising her hand up.  Per Ms. Battles, she has throbbing hip pain and \ncan hardly move unless she takes a lot of medicine.  The Claimant admitted that previously, she \nretired from work for six months but did not like just sitting around so she went back to work.  The \nClaimant can drive.    She confirmed  that  she  wants  the  surgery and  to  get  better.    She  is \ncontemplating  surgery  on  her  shoulder  but  has  been  told  to  go  back  in  a  year.    The  Claimant \ntestified that she has been told she will need hip replacement surgery in the future, but no one has \nsaid exactly when.   \nShe denied that prior to falling on January 29, 2023, she had not seen a doctor for her right \nhip.    The  Claimant  denied  that  she  ever  had  problems  with  her  right  shoulder  before  her  fall  at \nwork.  She denied previously seeing a doctor for her right shoulder, elbow, or hand.  The Claimant \nadmitted that some years ago, she injured her left hand.  Prior to January 29, 2023, the Claimant \nconfirmed  that  she  was  able  to  do  all  the  essential  functions  of  her  job  at  the  Department  of \nCorrection. \nOn   cross-examination Ms.   Battles confirmed   having   had   her   deposition   taken   on \nNovember 7, 2023.  She confirmed that her family physician is Dr. Thomas Moore.  The Claimant \nadmitted  that  her  normal  shift  hours  in  January  2023  were  from  6:00  a.m.  until  6:00 p.m.   She \nconfirmed that her fall occurred at the beginning of her shift on January 29, 2023.  The Claimant \nadmitted that after her fall, she still pushed on and finished working her shift that day.  However, \nthe Claimant did report her injury to Sergeant Best. \nThe  Claimant  confirmed  that  she sought  initial medical  treatment on  her  own from Dr. \nMoore  after  her  fall  because  he  is  her  primary  care  physician.   She  testified  that  Sergeant  Best \ncalled the 1-800 number to report her fall/claim.  The Claimant admitted that she was present when \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n11 \n \nthe call was made.  She further admitted that she talked about her incident and the fact that she \ninjured her right hand and took pictures.  The report also talks about some bruising and numbness \nto the right hand.  Management suggested the Claimant to go to MedExpress and then she was sent \nover to OrthoArkansas for her hand.  She admitted that she saw Ms. Pardoe, who works with Dr. \nJeanine Andersson.  The Claimant denied that she ever saw Dr. Jeanine Andersson.  She admitted \nto seeing Dr. Vargas for her shoulder.  \nDuring  her  deposition,  the  Claimant  admitted  she  testified  that  she  had an  unpleasant \nexperience with Ms. Pardoe because she kept bending/hurting her hand to get her to make a fist.  \nThe Claimant admitted that she had an x-ray done on her hand, and it did not show any kind of \nfracture.    Instead, Ms.  Pardoe assessed  the  Claimant  with  a  hand  contusion,  and released  the \nClaimant back to work at full duty.  She agreed that Dr. Vargas released her from his care and back \nto full duty on May 23, 2023, with no restrictions.  The Claimant admitted that she obtained the \ncane on her own.  She confirmed that on May 25, 2023, Dr. Vargas did another statement saying \nthat she could perform her job duties.   \nShe admitted that she has received physical therapy since May of 2023 for her right hand \nand shoulder.  As of the date of the hearing, she continued to receive physical therapy for her back \nas well.   The Claimant testified that she goes to physical therapy twice a week.  She admitted that \nno surgery is scheduled for her back, but it is a possibility in the future.  The Claimant admitted \nthat she has not tried to get her job back, nor has she looked for other work.  Ms. Battles confirmed \nthat Dr. Rhodes recommended surgery for her right wrist or elbow, following an EMG study. \nOn redirect examination, the Claimant admitted that she had hand surgery scheduled for \nDecember 27, 2023, with Dr. Rhodes.  However, Ms. Battles talked to her family and her daughter \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n12 \n \nis a nurse, and she suggested the Claimant wait.  She agreed that that she is expecting to go back \nand have the elbow and wrist surgery rescheduled, and have it done. \nNichole L. Metott \nMs.   Metott testified  on  behalf  of  the  Respondents.    She  has  been  the  workers’ \ncompensation and FMLA coordinator at the Department of Correction for ten years.  Ms. Metott \nconfirmed  that  she  has  worked  with  the  Claimant  since  January  2023.   She  was  not  aware  of \nanyone calling the 1-800 number, except the Claimant.   She confirmed that the company nurse’s \nreport of injury talked about the incident and/or the body part that was injured, and it lists the right \nhand.  Ms. Metott confirmed that the Claimant began seeing various doctors.  She admitted that \nshe heard the Claimant’s testimony about Ms. Pardoe and Dr. Vargas.    \nSpecifically, Ms. Metott confirmed that she receives medical records from the doctors as \nthey are treating workers’ compensation patients.  She admitted that she received medical records \nfrom Dr. Vargas  and Ms. Pardoe.   Per  a  return-to-work notice dated May  25, 2023, Dr. Vargas \napproved  for  Ms.  Battles to  return  to  work.   According  to  Ms.  Metott,  upon  receipt  of  this \ndocument, she must obtain from the treating doctor a form of the Essential Job Functions, which \nstates there are no restrictions placed on the employee upon their return to work.  She agreed that \nthe Essential Job Function Questionnaire Forms are given to the employee to give to the doctor.  \nMs. Metott denied having received the form from Dr. Vargas dated May 22, 2023, which listed \nthe Claimant’s physical restrictions.  However, Ms. Metott did  recall  having  received  the  form \ndated  May  25,  2023,  wherein Dr.  Vargas said that  the  Claimant  could  return  to  work  with  no \nrestrictions.  Ms.  Metott testified that the Claimant’s workers’ compensation claims adjuster \nreturned the form to her.              \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n13 \n \nAccording to Ms. Metott, she contacted their HR department, Cheryl Carroll, who was the \nunit manager at the time that the Claimant had been medically cleared.  According to Ms. Metott, \nthere  were  some  discussions  with  Ms.  Carroll  and  the  Claimant to  which  she  was  not  privy.  \nHowever, Ms. Metott testified that it was disclosed to her that the Claimant did not feel comfortable \nreturning to work, so they tried working out FMLA to protect her job.  She confirmed that they do \nhave  a  light  duty  program  to  bring employees back  to  work  at  less  than  full  duty.    Ms.  Metott \nconfirmed that it was finally decided that the Claimant’s employment was going to be ended.  \nShe testified that they tried to work on ADA accommodations for Ms. Battles.  However, \nMs. Metott further testified that when she requested more documentation for the accommodations,  \nthey received the same restrictions from earlier.  They also needed a note of an estimated time of \nwhen the Claimant could return to work.  Per Ms. Metott, the Claimant was given a deadline for \nturning in this paperwork, but she did not meet the deadline.  Ultimately, Ms. Metott explained \nthat the department had to end the Claimant’s employment.  She confirmed that the Claimant did \nin fact file a grievance to get her job back.  According to Ms. Metott, the Claimant withdrew her \ngrievance  prior  to  the  date  of  her hearing because  she had  been approved  for  Social  Security \nDisability benefits.  Ms. Metott confirmed that prior to January 2023 she had not had any dealings \nwith the Claimant. \nOn cross-examination Ms. Metott testified that she was not aware of the Claimant’s change \nof physician to treat with Dr. Thomas.  Nor was she aware of the fact that Dr. Thomas had sent the \nClaimant  to  an  orthopedic  surgeon.   However, Ms.  Metott was  aware  that  a  nurse  from \nrehabilitation went with Ms. Battles to her appointments.  She verified that she is not asserting that \nthe Claimant in any way “doctored” the medical note on page 33 of Claimant’s Exhibit 1.  \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n14 \n \nMs. Metott confirmed that the Claimant would not be able to do her job as a correctional \nsecurity officer.  She confirmed that she is aware that on May 25, 2023.  Dr. Bowen Hefley, an \northopedic surgeon, has the Claimant down for being able to perform sedentary work.  Ms. Metott \nconfirmed that with those restrictions, the Claimant would not be able to perform her job duties.  \nShe admitted that they did not offer the Claimant any light duty work based on the off-work-slip.  \nMs.  Metott further admitted  that  Dr.  Bowen  placed  these  restrictions  on  the  Claimant  again  on \nJune 22, 2023.  She admitted that they had not received anything from Dr. Bowen saying that Ms. \nBattles could return to work.  Ms. Metott agreed that if we accept Dr. Bowen’s report, the Claimant \nis off work. \n                                                    Medical Records  \nOn February 27, 2023, Ms. Battles underwent a 3-phase bone scan on her right hand.  The \nClaimant complained of numbness and swelling of the right since her injury.  Dr. Ben J. Bartnicke \nrendered the following impression: “1.  No abnormal blood flow, blood pool activity and delayed \nuptake right or wrist (symptomatic side).  2. Mild arthritic changes left hand wrist as discussed \nabove.”  \n On March 22, 2023, the Claimant underwent evaluation for physical therapy treatment by \nTracy Wilson, OTR, due to a right-hand median nerve contusion.  The Claimant presented to the \nclinic  for  weakness,  abnormal  sensation,  loss  of  dexterity,  stiffness,  and  pain.  Ms.  Battles \ncomplained of numbness, pain, decreased fine motor coordination, decreased strength, and loss of \ndexterity.  The Claimant was treated due to “1.  Contusion of right hand.  2. Pain right hand.  Skin \nsensation disturbance.  4. Stiffness of the joint of right hand.  5. Stiffness of right wrist.  6. Stiffness \nof joint of right elbow.  7. Stiffness of right shoulder.” \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n15 \n \n On April 12, 2023, Dr. Thomas Moore authored a Return to Work Note.  He indicated that \nthe Claimant’s injury or illness was due to right shoulder pain/contusion.  Dr. Moore directed the \nClaimant to remain off work until she was cleared by the ortho clinic that she was being referred \nfor further evaluation.       \n Ms. Battles underwent evaluation on April 23, 2023, by Dr. W. Scott Bowen.  At that time, \nthe  Claimant  presented  to  Dr.  Bowen  for  the  low  back  pain  and  related  symptoms.   Dr.  Bowen \nordered MRIs of the Claimant’s lumbar spine and right shoulder.  He returned the Claimant to \nsedentary work with no use of her right arm based on her current issues. \n On April 25, 2023, Dr. Bowen authored a letter: “To Whom It May Concern:  Please be \nadvised that Willie M. Battles is/has been under my orthopedic care.  She was seen in the office \nfor  an  appointment  today.    She  may  return  to  work  July  3,  2023.   Her  restrictions included: \n“sedentary work only, no lifting of right upper extremity.”      \n Dr. Bowen saw the Claimant for a follow-up visit on May 16, 2023, of her right hip and \nright shoulder and hand pain and weakness.  He noted that the Claimant was referred by Dr. Moore \nand they were unaware this was workers’ compensation case.  He also noted that the Claimant had \nalready been evaluated at OrthoArkansas by Dr. Vargas and she had gone through some physical \ntherapy and had an EMG and nerve conduction study of her right shoulder and arm.  However, \nthose  results  were  not  available.  Diagnostic  test findings of the MRI of the Claimant’s lumbar \nspine showed some mild canal stenosis from L3 to L4-L5 moderate bilateral foraminal stenosis at \nL4-L5.  The right shoulder MRI shows a low-grade partial tear and tendinitis of the supraspinatus \nand tendinosis of the infraspinatus a small partial tear of the subscapularis and mild glenohumeral \narthrosis without a significant rotator cuff tear.  Per this medical note, earlier x-rays of the pelvis \nrevealed moderate arthritis with cystic changes in the acetabulum.  Dr. Bowen’s impression was \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n16 \n \n“Traumatic injury from her initial fall producing right shoulder weakness and apparently a nerve \ninjury to her hand.” His  treatment  plan  included  a  referral  to  Dr.  Collins  to  help  manage  her \nworkers’ compensation claim and she was not in need of surgical intervention from his perspective \nat that time.  The Claimant was given an excuse for her office visit.  Dr. Bowen said that he would \nmake a referral to a specialist and contact her with that appointment.  At that time, he also said that \nthe Claimant will remain off work until her appointment with Dr. Kevin Collins.  \n On May 22, 2023, Dr. Vargas returned the Claimant to full duty work with no restrictions.  \nHowever, per the Essential Job Function Questionnaire provided by the Arkansas Department of \nCorrection he checked several functions that the Claimant was restricted from engaging in several \nactivities.   \n However,  just  two  days later May  25, 2023, Dr.  Vargas  completed  the  Essential  Job \nFunction  Questionnaire  provided  by  the  Arkansas  Department  of  Correction.    Dr.  Vargas  note \nchecked all the boxes “Yes” saying the Claimant could perform all the essential job activities. \n On  June  7, 2023, Ms.  Battles presented  to  the  office  of  Dr.  Brad  Thomas  with  a chief \ncomplaint  of  a  work  accident.    Dr.  Thomas  noted  that  the  Claimant  fell  on an  uneven concrete \nsidewalk and rolled over onto her right side.  The Claimant reported having bruised her right hand \nvery badly.  According to this medical report, Ms. Battles originally thought she was going to be \nokay.  A couple of days later the Claimant went to see her PCP/Dr. Thomas Moore.  Dr. Thomas \nsent the Claimant for physical therapy on her right hip and right hand.  Per this clinic note, although \nMs. Battles reported she was unable to make a fist and the physical therapist documented this, the \nClaimant was then released from care.  The Claimant reported to Dr. Thomas she was currently \ndoing therapy at Markham Injury Clinic for her right hand and shoulder with some improvement.  \nThe Claimant was also released to work for her hand and shoulder.  According to this report, Ms. \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n17 \n \nBattles has been walking with a cane since February due to mobility problems with her back.   Dr. \nThomas assessed the Claimant with “low back pain.”  Although the Claimant had an MRI of her \nback done previously, Dr. Thomas was unable to view the images remotely.  He planned to review \nthe MRI and contact her later with his recommendation.  Dr. Thomas stated that if he did not find \nan issue with her spine, he would refer her back to Dr. Bowen.      \n Ms. Battles presented to the clinic of Bowen Hefley Orthopedics on June 22, 2023, for a \nfollow-up visit.  During that clinic visit, the Claimant underwent reevaluation by Christian Perry, \nPA-C for right shoulder and back pain.  The Claimant reported that she was taking part in physical \ntherapy and had made progress with her shoulder but continued to have discomfort in her spine.   \nPerry’s assessment was “Chronic right shoulder and back pain, for which she continued the \nClaimant’s formalized physical therapy.”  She stated that the Claimant was not a surgical candidate \nand that she believed further conservative care was warranted.  Per this note, Perry instructed the \nClaimant  to  stay  off  work  until Dr.  Kevin  Collins  evaluated  her.   According  to this  medical \ndocumentation, Perry said that they would make a referral to a specialist and contact the Claimant \nwith that appointment. \n Also  on  June  22,  2023,  Dr.  Bowen  completed  the  Arkansas  Department  of  Correction \nEssential  Job  Function  Questionnaire  for  a  Correctional  Officer  I/Corporal.    He  checked all the \nboxes for “No,” saying that the Claimant did not have the ability to perform any of the functions \nwith or without reasonable accommodation.  Dr. Bowen specifically said that the Claimant was \ntemporarily disabled.      \n Dr.  Moore  reevaluated  the  Claimant  in  another  follow-up  visit  for  her  hip  and  shoulder \npain on July 17, 2023.  He also reevaluated the Claimant on August 14, 2023.   \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n18 \n \n Subsequently on November 2, 2023, Dr. Bowen saw Ms. Battles for evaluation of her right \nshoulder,  lower  back,  right  hip,  and  right-hand  complaints.   Dr.  Bowen  reported  that physical \nexamination of the Claimant’s right shoulder revealed, “Right shoulder she is guarding and today \nand is tender globally but more so over the anterolateral acromial area with assistance, I am able \nto  forward  elevate  to  about  120  degrees  and  abduct  to  90  and there  is  guarding  and  resistance \nbeyond that. She is tender over the lateral acromial area referring to the deltoid.  Mildly positive \nJobe’s and O’Brien sign noted.”  His examination of her right hip revealed “Tenderness in the \nanterior and lateral hip and groin area with rotation of her hip and forward flexion.  Neuro intact.”  \nDr. Bowen planned to change the Claimant’s physical therapy treatment to their location, to see if \nshe is responding to therapy.  He also planned to obtain the results of the EMG nerve conduction \nstudies and refer her to one of their hand specialists to figure out the next step for her hand and \nwrist.  Dr. Bowen said that if the Claimant does not respond to conservative care for her shoulder, \nthen she may be a candidate for arthroscopic surgery later.  He stated that the Claimant’s right hip \nis arthritic and predated her injury and was not caused by her fall but was possibly aggravated by \nthe injury and she will face total hip replacement later in life.  Additionally, Dr. Bowen said he \nwould make a referral to a pain management specialist and contact the Claimant.      \n Dr. David Rhodes evaluated the Claimant right hand on November 30, 2023.  He stated \nthat the nerve conduction study performed on March 8, 2023, was unremarkable.  However, Dr. \nRhodes  stated  that  the  Claimant  was  diagnosed  with  possible  early  carpal  and  cubital  tunnel \nsyndrome.  She treated conservatively with splints and continued to have numbness and tingling \nthat is progressively getting worse.  The Claimant reported that she had also noticed weakness in \nher right upper extremity that has gotten worse over the past two months.  Dr. Rhodes’ impression \nwas  “Right  cubital  tunnel  Syndrome;  and  right-hand  carpal  tunnel  syndrome,”  which  he \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n19 \n \nrecommended that the Claimant undergo “right median nerve decompression at the wrist and right \nulnar nerve decompression at the elbow.” \n On December 7, 2023, the Claimant returned to Dr Bowen’s office for a follow up visit.  \nShe returned after having started therapy which helped a lit bit.  The injection to her shoulder did \nnot help.  Dr. Bowen’s impression was: “Right shoulder myofascial strain with mild bursitis.  Right \ncarpal tunnel syndrome, lower back spinal arthritis, and mild arthritis right hip.”  As a result, Dr. \nBowen stated, “I believe she needs to be under pain management.”              \n                    ADJUDICATION \nA. Additional Medical Treatment  \nAn  employer  shall  promptly  provide  for  an  injured  employee  such  medical  treatment  as \nmay be reasonably necessary in connection with the injury received by the employee.  Ark. Code \nAnn.  §11-9-508(a).    The Claimant bears  the  burden  of  proving  that she  is  entitled  to  additional \nmedical treatment.  Dalton v. Allen Eng'g Co., 66 Ark. App. 201, 989 S.W.2d 543 (1999).  \n Reasonable  and  necessary  medical  services  may  include  those  necessary  to  accurately \ndiagnose the nature and extent of the compensable injury, to reduce or alleviate symptoms resulting \nfrom  the  compensable  injury,  to  maintain  the  level  of  healing  achieved;  or  to  prevent further \ndeterioration of the damage produced by the compensable injury.  Jordan v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 51 \nArk. App. 100, 911 S.W. 2d 593 (1995).  \n Here, Ms. Battles, sustained admittedly compensable injuries on January 29, 2023, during \nand  in  the  course  of  her  employment  with  the  Department  of  Correction,  while  working  as  a \ncorrectional officer at the Benton Work Release  Center.  She was injured when she tripped and \nfell on over some uneven concrete sidewalk, injuring her right side.  The Claimant’s primary injury \nwas to her hand.  In particular, Ms. Battles sustained compensable injuries to her right hand/arm, \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n20 \n \nright shoulder,  hip  and  back. The Claimant  has  received  conservative  treatment  for  her \ncompensable injuries.  Most of the Claimant’s initial medical care was done at OrthoArkansas by \nDr. Vargas and Jenna Pardoe, PA-C. The Respondents paid for this treatment.  Dr. Vargas provided \nthe Claimant with treatment for her hip and shoulder injuries.  On April 3, 2023, Dr. Vargas found \nthe  Claimant  to  be  at  maximum  medical  improvement/MMI  for  her  hip  and  shoulder  injuries.  \nPardoe primarily treated the Claimant’s hand and found her to be at MMI for that injury on April \n10,  2023.  However,  these conservative treatment  modalities in  the  form  of  medications  and \nphysical  therapy have provided the Claimant with only minimal  relief from her pain  and  other \nrelated symptomatology resulting from her compensable fall of January 29, 2023.   \nAs a result, the Claimant sought additional medical care for her injuries on her own and \nsome of the medical treatment was not pursuant to a valid referral and was thus unauthorized.  At \nthe beginning of the hearing, the Claimant’s attorney acknowledges that this occurred. Therefore, \nit is Claimant’s position that the Respondents are not liable for the initial treatment the Claimant \nreceived from Dr.  Bowen.    However,  the  Claimant  received  a  change  of  physician  to treat Dr. \nThomas, who in June of 2023 referred the Claimant back to Dr. Bowen after performing diagnostic \nstudies.  (TR. 9)  \nTherefore, at issue it is the medical treatment of record that the Claimant received from Dr. \nBowen beginning in June 2023 when Dr. Thomas referred the Claimant back to Dr. Bowen as part \nof the authorized physician chain of referral.  Also, the Claimant was referred to Dr. Rhodes for \ntreatment of her injuries.    \nDespite  extensive  conservative  medical  treatment, the Claimant  has continued  with \nsignificant pain and other related symptoms since her fall.  However, this treatment modality only \nintensified the Claimant’s symptoms, particular her right hand and arm symptoms.  The Claimant \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n21 \n \ncredibly testified that prior to her accidental fall at work she was able to perform her job duties as \na correctional officer without any difficulties.  Her testimony proves that she had not had any prior \nproblems with her right hand, hip, shoulder or back.  Nor had the Claimant ever sought any earlier \nmedical treatment for these bodily parts.  No evidence whatsoever has been presented to conflict \nMs. Battles’ testimony in this regard.        \nThe Claimant has also treated conservatively with splints, but she has continued to have  \nnumbness and tingling in her had that is progressively getting worse.  The Claimant reported that \nshe had also noticed weakness in her right upper extremity that has gotten progressively worse.  \nThere is no evidence showing that the Claimant sustained a subsequent accident after her work-\nrelated  fall  in  January  of  2023.  In  November  2023  Dr.  Rhodes  evaluated  the  Claimant.    His \nimpression was “Right cubital tunnel Syndrome; and right-hand carpal tunnel syndrome,” for \nwhich he recommended that the Claimant undergo “right median nerve decompression at the wrist \nand right ulnar nerve decompression at the elbow.” Although the Claimant scheduled to undergo \nthis surgery, she cancelled the surgery.  However, Ms. Battles testified that she is now willing to \nundergo this surgery.  Additionally, Dr. Bowen has recommended that the Claimant undergo pain \nmanagement for her other injuries.   \n  In light of the persistent nature of the Claimant’s symptoms despite various conservative \ntreatment  modalities,  the  lack  of any  of  these symptoms  prior  to her injury,  and  there  being  no \nindependent intervening cause, I find that the Claimant has established by a preponderance of the \ncredible evidence that her work-related incident of January 29, 2023, has resulted in her need for \nadditional  medical  treatment provided  and recommended  by  Dr. Rhodes  to include the above \nsurgical  intervention,  as  well  as  the  recommendation  for  pain  management  as indicated by  Dr.  \nBowen. \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n22 \n \n  In other words, I this find that all the medical treatment of record made on valid referral \nper the  recommendation  of  Dr.  Thomas  beginning  in  June  of  2023  is reasonable  and  necessary \ntreatment in connection with the Claimant’s compensable fall January 2023.  Hence, I further find \nthat  this  additional  medical  treatment of  record  and  that which  has  been  recommended  by  Dr. \nBowen is reasonably necessary to reduce and/or alleviate the Claimant’s compensable hip, back \nand shoulder injuries, and their resulting symptoms.       \n I realize that Dr. Vargas and Ms. Pardoe have assessed the Claimant to be at MMI for her \nwork injuries, however, minimal weight has been assigned to these assessments based on all of the \nabove cited evidence to contrary.       \nB.  Temporary Total Disability Compensation \nIn the present matter, the Claimant has asserted her entitlement to temporary total disability \ncompensation from  May  2023 to  a  date  yet  to  be decided.   The  Claimant  sustained  both \nunscheduled and scheduled injuries.  However, the Claimant’s most significant injury has been to \nher  right  hand/arm,  which  is  a  scheduled  injury.    Therefore,  for  the  purpose  of  temporary  total \ndisability compensation, the Claimant’s right-hand injury will be addressed in this regard since the \nClaimant is allowed to recover for only one period of temporary total disability.  The Claimant’s \nhand injury is a scheduled injury.  \n     An employee who has suffered a scheduled injury is entitled to compensation for temporary \ntotal disability during her healing period or until the employee returns to work, whichever occurs \nfirst.  Wheeler Constr. Co. v. Armstrong, 73 Ark. App. 146, 41 S.W.3d 822 (2001).  The healing \nperiod is that period for healing of the injury which continues until the employee is as far restored \nas the permanent character of the injury will permit.  Nix v. Wilson World Hotel, 46 Ark. App. \n303, 879 S.W.2d 457 (1994).  If the underlying condition causing the disability has become more \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n23 \n \nstable and if nothing further in the way of treatment will improve that condition, the healing period \nhas ended.  Id. Whether an employee's healing period has ended is a factual determination to be \nmade  by  the  Commission.  Ketcher  Roofing  Co.  v.  Johnson,  50  Ark.  App.  63,  901  S.W.2d  25 \n(1995). \nHere, the Claimant sustained a compensable injury to her right hand/arm,” on January 29, \n2023.  Since this time, the Claimant has continued in significant pain, tingling and numbness of \nher  right  hand.    After  the  Claimant  failed  conservative  treatment to her  right  hand,  Dr.  Rhodes \nrecommended surgery, which she is now willing to undergo.  Because of her right-hand injury, the \nClaimant has not returned to work as a correctional officer at least since May of 2023.  \nHence, the Claimant’s testimony and the documentary medical reports support a finding \nthat the Claimant’s healing period for her hand injury has not ended since the date of her injury. \nUnder  these  circumstances,  I  find  that  the Claimant has  remained  in  her healing  period  since \nJanuary 29, 2023, and continuing.   \nTherefore, based on the record, I further find that the Claimant proved by a preponderance \nof  the  evidence  her entitlement  to  temporary  total  disability  from May  of  2023,  and  continuing \nuntil the pronouncement of maximum medical improvement by Dr. Rhodes following her surgery. \nC.  Attorney’s Fee \nThe Respondents have stipulated that they controverted this claim for additional benefits  \nin its entirety.  Therefore, the Claimant’s attorney is entitled to a controverted attorney’s fee on all \nindemnity benefits awarded to the Claimant, pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-715. \n  \nAWARD \n \nThe Respondents are directed to pay benefits in accordance with the findings of fact set \nforth herein this Opinion.   \n\nBATTLES – H301023 \n24 \n \nAll accrued sums shall be paid in lump sum without discount, and this award shall earn \ninterest at the legal rate until paid, pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-809. \n  Per Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-715, the Claimant’s attorney is entitled to a 25% attorney’s fee \non the indemnity benefits awarded herein.  This fee is to be paid one-half by the carrier and one-\nhalf by the Claimant.  \nAll issues not addressed herein are expressly reserved under the Act. \nIT IS SO ORDERED. \n \n \n       __________________________ \n       CHANDRA L. BLACK \n       ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO.: H301023 WILLIE MAE BATTLES, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF CORRRECTION/ (BENTON WORK RELEASE CENTER), EMPLOYER RESPONDENT PUBLIC EMPLOYEE CLAIMS DIVISION, INSURANCE CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION FILED MAY 6, 2024 A hearing was held before Adminis...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:53:51.509Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H301023-2024-05-06","pdf":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/BATTLES_WILLIE_H301023_20240506.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}