{"id":"alj-H307140-2024-07-31","awcc_number":"H307140","decision_date":"2024-07-31","opinion_type":"alj","claimant_name":"Angel Lindsey","employer_name":null,"title":"LINDSEY VS. CADDO HILLS SCHOOL DISTRICTAWCC# H307140July 31, 2024","outcome":"denied","outcome_keywords":["denied:1"],"injury_keywords":["ankle","fracture"],"pdf_url":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/LINDSEY_ANGEL_H307140_20240731.pdf","source_index_url":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/","filename":"LINDSEY_ANGEL_H307140_20240731.pdf","text_length":19282,"full_text":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION \n \n WCC NO. H307140 \n \nANGEL LINDSEY, Employee CLAIMANT \n \nCADDO HILLS SCHOOL DISTRICT, Employer RESPONDENT \n \nARKANSAS SCHOOL BOARDS ASSN., Carrier RESPONDENT \n \n OPINION FILED JULY 31, 2024 \n \nHearing  before  ADMINISTRATIVE  LAW  JUDGE  ERIC  PAUL  WELLS  in Russellville, Pope \nCounty, Arkansas. \n \nClaimant represented by KENNETH A. OLSEN, Attorney at Law, Bryant, Arkansas. \n \nRespondents represented by JARROD S. PARRISH, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas. \n \n STATEMENT OF THE CASE \n \n On May  2,  2024,  the  above  captioned  claim  came  on  for  a  hearing  at Russellville, \nArkansas.      A  pre-hearing  conference  was  conducted  on March  11,  2024,  and  a  Pre-hearing \nOrder  was  filed  on March  12,  2024.      A  copy  of  the  Pre-hearing  Order  has  been  marked \nCommission's Exhibit 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 \nOctober 31, 2023. \n 3. The respondents have controverted the claim in its entirety. \n 4. The claimant was earning sufficient wages to entitle her to compensation at the weekly \nrates  of  $813.00  for  temporary  total  disability  benefits  and  $610.00  for  permanent  partial \ndisability benefits. \n\nLindsey – H307140 \n \n-2- \n 5. The claimant reserves the issue of temporary total disability 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 right leg on or about October \n31, 2024. \n 2. Whether Claimant is entitled to medical treatment for her compensable right leg injury. \n The claimant's contentions are as follows: \n“Claimant contends that she sustained a compensable injury to her \nright  lower  extremity  in  the  course  and  scope  of  her  employment \non October 31, 2023, is entitled to medical and indemnity benefits, \nthat  Respondents  controverted  the  claim  in  its  entirety,  and  she  is \nalso entitled to attorney’s fee.” \n \n The respondents’ contentions are as follows: \n“Respondents contend that Claimant did not suffer a compensable \ninjury  under  the  Arkansas  Workers’  Compensation  Act. \nRespondents contend that in the event compensability is found, the \nclaimant  has  only  missed  13  days  of  work  and  would  only  be \nentitled  to  temporary  disability  benefits  for  a  one-week  period \nbased   on   the   waiting   period   under   the   Arkansas   Workers' \nCompensation Act.” \n \n The claimant in this matter is a 35-year-old female who was employed by the respondent \nas a fourth grade teacher. The claimant alleges that she sustained a compensable right leg injury \non  or  about  October  31,  2023,  when  she  fell.  As  a  result  of  that  fall  the  claimant  sustained \nfractures to her right ankle. In direct examination testimony the claimant described going to work \non October 31, 2023, and her activities before she fell as follows: \nQ Okay.  On  October  31\nst\n of  2023,  what  time  did  you  get  to \nwork? \n \nA 7:20. \n \nQ What did you do once you got there? \n \n\nLindsey – H307140 \n \n-3- \nA I gathered my material, got my children out of the car after \nI parked on top of that little hill and I noticed that we had our first \nfrost. The stairs were iced over with frost. The grass had a little bit \nof  frost  on  it.  I  thought  it  would  be  safer  to  ascend  down  or \ndescend  down  the  hill  on  the  grass  versus  the  stairs  because  they \nwere slippery. They had nothing on them except the ice, so I chose \nto  go  down  the  hill  with  my  youngest  son.  My  oldest  had  already \nmade  it  down  the  hill  into  the  building  when  I  fell  with  my \nyoungest son beside me. \n \n In hearing testimony, the claimant described the area she parked in as a parking lot on top \nof a hill. The claimant further testified that while parking in the lower lot in the past, her car was \nhit  on  two  different  occasions.  The  claimant  gave  direct  examination  testimony  about  why  she \nparked on top of the hill as follows: \nQ Had you previously parked on the lower level? \n \nA Before I was told to park up on the hill, yes. \n \nQ By whom were you told to park – \n \nA Deborah Stephens. \n \nQ Let me finish my question. \n \nA Oh, I’m sorry. \n \nQ By whom were you directed to park on the upper level? \n \nA Deborah Stephens. \n \nQ And who is that person? \n \nA She was my principal at the time. \n \nQ Is she currently the principal? \n \nA She is not. \n \nQ Were  you  told  why  you  needed  to  park  on  the  upper  level \nrather than the lower level? \n \n\nLindsey – H307140 \n \n-4- \nA She didn’t go into detail, but she informed me that it was a \ngood idea for me to park up at the top. \n \nQ Were  you  given  an  explanation  of  why  your  vehicle  being \nhit twice required that you park somewhere else? \n \nA I was told it was a better idea for me to park at the top. \n \nQ From that point on did you park on the upper level? \n \nA Yes, sir. \n \nQ And  how  long,  approximately,  before  October  the  31\nst\n of \n’23 did that occur? \n \nA At least a year. \n \n The  claimant  also  gave  direct  examination  testimony  about  the  fall  itself  and  the \naftermath shortly thereafter: \nQ All right. Do you know what caused you to fall? \n \nA The  ice  on  the  grass  and  the  hill  having  to  descend  down \nthe hill. There was no handrail to get down the steps, so I couldn’t \ndescend the steps. I didn’t feel like that was a safe option for me. \n \nQ Can you kind of go through – I know this happened pretty \nquickly – the exact manner in which you fell? \n \nA All  right.  I  started  to  go  down  the  hill  and  I  took  three  or \nfour steps, maybe, and I felt my foot slide out from underneath me \nand  everything – it  was  really  disorienting  and  everything  kind  of \nhappened  very  quickly.  I  felt  my  foot  slide.  I  feel  like  I  probably \nsat down on my leg and my ankle. And then I was at the bottom of \nthe  little  hill  where  I  kind  of  came  aware  of  what  was  happening \nand I was in a lot of pain. \n \nQ Did you try to get up and go into the school? \n \nA I tried to stand or I tried to move where I could stand and I \ncouldn’t. It was a lot of pain. It was a lot of – I couldn’t figure out \nwhy  everything  hurt  so  bad,  so  they  had  to  call – they  had  to  call \nthe nurse to come bring me a wheelchair. \n \n\nLindsey – H307140 \n \n-5- \nSometime  during  all  of  that,  another  teacher  came  up  to  me.  Ms. \nHanson  came  up  to  me  and  was  kind  of  helping.  Jason  Caldwell, \nour  maintenance  person,  he  does  maintenance  for  the  school,  he \nhad come up to me. He had actually fallen behind me. After I fell, \nhe came up to me sometime just a little bit later  and had fallen as \nwell in the same spot I fell. Lucky he didn’t fall on me and he was \nokay, but he fell as well. \n \nQ And who was that? \n \nA Jason Caldwell. \n \nQ And what is his position? \n \nA He  does  maintenance.  I  don’t  know  if  he  is  over \nmaintenance or not. \n \nQ Did more than one person come to your aid? \n \nA Yes, sir. I remember Hartwick being there with Ms. Tandy \nwith the wheelchair. And I don’t remember who else helped me \nup, but I know it was him and someone else helped me get into the \nwheelchair. \n \nI note that Brad Hartwick was present  at the hearing and called as a  witness by the respondent. \nMr.  Hartwick  is  the  current  elementary  school  principal  and  also  served  in  that  capacity  on \nOctober 31, 2023, when the claimant fell. \n The claimant was taken by a family member to Chi St. Vincent’s Hospital in Hot Springs, \nArkansas, that same day. Medical records from the claimant’s ER visit, in part, state: \nCHIEF  COMPLAINT:  Displaced  trimalleolar  ankle  fracture  right \nankle. \n \nPROCEDURE  SCHEDULED:  Open  reduction  internal  fixation \nright ankle. \n \nHPI:  Angel  Renee  Lindsey  is  a  34  y.o.  female  who  recently  fell \nonto  the  right  ankle.  This  was  the  result  of  a  mechanical  fall. \nPatient slipped on an “icy hill.” The patient had the onset of pain \nand inability to bear full weight onto the involved side. Subsequent \nx-ray  showed  a  displaced  trimalleolar  fracture  dislocation  of  the \n\nLindsey – H307140 \n \n-6- \nright  ankle.  This  was  reduced  and  splinted  in  the  ED.  She  was \nadmitted for pain control and surgical intervention. She denies any \nprior history on the right lower extremity. \n \nI  have  discussed  the  situation  with  the  patient  at  length.  They \nunderstand their problems as well as the different operative options \nthey have. They understand the potential for blood clots, infection, \nfailure  of  hardware,  incomplete  resolution  of  pain,  the  possibility \nof   revision   surgery,   and   up   to   and   including   death.   They \nunderstand  these  risks  and  accepts  them.  They  have  no  further \nquestions. \n \n The claimant was admitted to the hospital at that time and underwent several diagnostic \ntests  on  her  right  ankle,  including  x-rays  and  a  CT  scan,  both  of  which  revealed  right  ankle \nfractures. Following is a portion of the report of the CT scan on the claimant’s left ankle: \nFINDINGS: A nondisplaced medial malleolar fracture is identified \nwith  both  vertical  and  horizontal  components  extending  to  the \ntibiotalar   joint.   A   nondisplaced   vertically   oriented   posterior \nmalleolar fracture is identified with extension to the tibiotalar joint. \nA  nondisplaced  spiral  oblique  fracture  is  present  of  the  distal \nfibular diaphysis above the level of the ankle mortise. No evidence \nof   talar   or   calcaneal   fracture.   Small   heel   spurs   noted.   No \nsignificant  degenerative  changes  of  the  tibiotalar  subtalar  joints. \nSmall    tibiotalar    joint    effusion.    Soft    tissue    swelling    and \nsubcutaneous  edema  throughout  the  ankle  joint.  No  subcutaneous \nemphysema or radiopaque foreign bodies. \n \nIMPRESSION:  \n1. Nondisplaced trimalleolar fractures as described. \n \n On  November  2,  2023,  the  claimant  underwent  surgical  intervention  at  the  hands  of  Dr. \nChristopher Young at Chi St. Vincent’s Hospital. Following is a portion of that operative report: \nPre-operative Diagnosis: right trimalleolar ankle fracture \n \nPost-operative Diagnosis: Same \n \nProcedure  Performed:  Open  reduction  internal  fixation  of  right \ntrimalleolar ankle fracture \n \n\nLindsey – H307140 \n \n-7- \n It is the claimant’s burden to prove that she sustained a compensable injury to her right \nleg,  more  specifically,  her  right  ankle,  on  October  31,  2023,  as  she  alleges.  It  is  without  doubt \nthat the claimant fell on that day as she was going into her workplace. Clearly, there is evidence \nthrough  x-rays,  the  CT  scan,  and  surgical  records  of  objective  medical  findings.  However,  the \nclaimant also has to prove her fall occurred while she was performing employment services for \nthe respondent.  \nA compensable injury is defined, in part, as an accidental injury which arises out of an in \nthe course of employment. A.C.A.§ 11-9-102(4)(A)(I). However, a compensable injury does not \ninclude an injury “inflicted upon the employee at a time when employment services were not \nbeing  performed.”  A.C.A.  §11-9-102(4)(B)(iii).   An   employee   is   performing   employment \nservices  when  they  are  doing  something  that  is  generally  required  by  his  or  her  employer. \nContinental Construction Co. v. Nabors, 2015 Ark. App. 60, 454 S.W.3d 762; White v. Georgia-\nPacific Corp., 339 Ark. 474, 478, 6 S.W.3d 98, 100 (1999). The same test is used to determine \nwhether  an  employee  is  performing  employment  services  as  is  used  when  determining  whether \nan employee is acting within the course and scope of employment. The test is whether the injury \noccurred  within  the  time  and  space  boundaries  of  the  employment,  when  the  employee  was \ncarrying  out  the  employer’s  purpose  or  advancing  the  employer’s  interest  either  directly  or \nindirectly. Pifer v. Single Source Transportation, 347 Ark. 851, 69 S.W.3d 1 (2002). \n On cross examination the claimant was asked about her assigned classroom and her duty \nassignment as follows: \nQ Ms.  Lindsey,  we  have  established  your  position  at  Caddo \nHills as an ELA and social studies teacher; right? \n \nA Yes, sir. \n \n\nLindsey – H307140 \n \n-8- \nQ Still fourth grade? \n \nA Yes. \n \nQ And you have your own assigned classroom, correct? \n \nA Yes, sir. \n \nQ And the duty that you talked about is done on your hallway \noutside  of  your  classroom  between  your  classroom  and  another \nclassroom, right? \n \nA Yes,  sir.  Between  fourth  grade,  third  grade,  second  grade, \nand first. \n \nQ All right. And the tardy bell for your first class rings at 7:45 \na.m.? \n \nA Yes, sir. \n \n The  claimant  was  also  asked  on  cross  examination  about  where  her  classroom  and  duty \nstation were in relation to where she had parked her automobile: \nQ Okay.  The  place  where  you  parked  was  maybe  half  a \nfootball field from your classroom; correct? \n \nA Total distance. \n \nQ Yes. And that is half a football field away from where your \nduty would have been as well; correct? \n \nA Sure. \n \nQ To get to your classroom, you told me you had to go down \nthe hill, across the lower parking lot, through the middle doors into \nthe building, turn right, go all the way down the hall, and then your \nclassroom  was  on  the  left  at  the  last  stretch  of  hallway;  is  that \nright? \n \nA Yes, sir. \n \nQ And  then  the  office  is  pretty  much  on  the  opposite  side  of \nthe building? \n \n\nLindsey – H307140 \n \n-9- \nA Yes. \n \nQ Okay.  There  is  no  security  checkpoint  or  guard  check  or \nanything that you have to check into to come to school? \n \nA No, sir. \n \nQ And there is no gate or barrier you have to open or unlock \nto get to school? \n \nA No, sir. \n \nQ All right. At the time you fell, you were coming into work? \n \nA Yes, sir. \n \nQ Would you agree with that? \n \nA Yes, sir. \n \n On cross examination the claimant was asked about performing job duties on the day of \nher fall prior to its occurrence as follows: \nQ You pulled your vehicle in, got out, and went down the hill \nand fell, but you had not discharged any job duties at that point in \ntime; correct? \n \nA When I am on campus, I am expected to provide assistance \nwhenever needed. \n \nQ I didn’t ask you what was expected. I asked about what \nhappened that day. That day you had not discharged any job duties; \nhad you? \n \nA I had stepped out of my car and was coming down the hill \nand that is when I fell. \n \nQ And  that  day  you  had  not  discharged  any  job  duties;  had \nyou? \n \nA There were no duties performed while I was walking in that \nshort amount of time between my car and the hill. \n \n\nLindsey – H307140 \n \n-10- \nQ Okay.   That   is   what   I   am   getting   at.   You   had   not \nencountered any job tasks needed to be done for the school before \nyou fell; had you? \n \nA If I had, I might not have fallen. \n \nQ Okay. But you didn’t; right? \n \nA No, I did not. \n \nQ And the video is going to show there is no children present \nthat need to be supervised or helped our guided – \n \nA Other  than  my  youngest  son  who  is  a  student  at  Caddo \nHills. \n \nQ Well, that is your son in your vehicle; right? \n \nA He was walking beside me. \n \nQ Right. You bring him to school every day; right? \n \nA I do. \n \nQ Okay. So there are no students that aren’t related to you in \nthe area that might need your assistance as a teacher? \n \nA I don’t know who was around me at the time whenever I \nfell because it happened so fast. \n*** \nQ [BY  MR.  PARRISH]:  You  hadn’t  interacted  with  any \nbosses   or   supervisors   to   receive   any   special   instructions   or \nassignments at that point; correct? \n \nA No, sir. \n \nQ And  the  stuff  you  were  carrying  in  your  arms  was  not \nspecial,  unique  or  urgent  in  any  way  compared  to  what  you  bring \nin every day; right? \n \nA No, sir. \n \nQ Okay. And you agree if there are no students there to assist \nand  there  were  no  teachers  there  to  assist,  then  there  would  be  no \n\nLindsey – H307140 \n \n-11- \njob  duties  to  discharge  at  that  point  in  time.  Do  you  agree  with \nthat? \n \nA It  depends.  If  there  is  no  one  present,  then  there  is  no  one \nfor me to assist, but .... \n \nQ So you wouldn’t be discharged in a job duty; correct? \n \nA Not at that particular moment in time. \n \nI will note that Mr. Hartwick, who was present shortly after the claimant’s fall, testified that \nthere  were  no  children  in  the  area  at  the  time.  His  testimony  is  supported  by  the  surveillance \nvideo that was placed into evidence. \n After  a  review  of  the  testimony  and  evidence  in  this  matter  it  does  not  appear  that  the \nclaimant  was  performing  employment  services  at  the  time  of  her  fall.  Certainly,  she  was  going \nfrom  her  automobile  to  her  work,  but  was  not  performing  job  duties  at  the  time  of  her  fall  or \nadvancing her employer’s interests either directly or indirectly. There were no children in the \narea at the time of the claimant’s fall nor any other peer or supervisor to interact with the \nclaimant at that time. She was, at the exact time of her fall, only accompanied by her child, who \nis a student at that school, as she brought him daily with her. The claimant is unable to prove that \nshe sustained a compensable injury to her right leg on October 31, 2023. \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  witnesses and  to  observe their demeanor,  the  following  findings  of  fact  and  conclusions  of \nlaw are made in accordance with A.C.A. §11-9-704: \n \n \n \n\nLindsey – H307140 \n \n-12- \n FINDINGS OF FACT & CONCLUSIONS OF LAW \n 1.  The  stipulations  agreed  to  by  the  parties  at  the  pre-hearing  conference  conducted  on \nMarch 11, 2024, and contained in a Pre-hearing Order filed March 12, 2024, are hereby accepted \nas fact. \n 2. The  claimant  failed  to  prove  by  a  preponderance  of  the  evidence  that  she  sustained  a \ncompensable injury to her right leg on or about October 31, 2023. \n 3. The claimant has failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence her entitlement to \nmedical treatment for her compensable right leg injury. \n ORDER \nPursuant  to  the  above  findings  and  conclusions,  I  have  no  alternative  but  to  deny  this \nclaim in its entirety. \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. \n IT IS SO ORDERED. \n \n                                ____________________________                                               \n       HONORABLE ERIC PAUL WELLS \n       ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE","preview":"BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION WCC NO. H307140 ANGEL LINDSEY, Employee CLAIMANT CADDO HILLS SCHOOL DISTRICT, Employer RESPONDENT ARKANSAS SCHOOL BOARDS ASSN., Carrier RESPONDENT OPINION FILED JULY 31, 2024 Hearing before ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE ERIC PAUL WELLS in Russellville, Pope County, Arkans...","fetched_at":"2026-05-19T22:52:21.303Z","links":{"html":"/opinions/alj-H307140-2024-07-31","pdf":"https://www.labor.arkansas.gov/wp-content/uploads/LINDSEY_ANGEL_H307140_20240731.pdf","source_publisher":"https://labor.arkansas.gov/workers-comp/awcc-opinions/administrative-law-judge-opinions/"}}