Billy Williams v. City of Kansas City, Missouri

Employee: Billy B. Williams

Injury No: 03-136275

Dependents: N/A

Employer: City of Kansas City, Missouri

Additional Party: Treasurer of the State of Missouri as the Custodian of the Second Injury Fund

Insurer: Self-Insured

Hearing Date: October 30, 2009

1. Are any benefits awarded herein? Yes
2. Was the injury or occupational disease compensable under Chapter 287? Yes
3. Was there an accident or incident of occupational disease under the Law? Yes
4. Date of accident or onset of occupational disease: December 26, 2003
5. State location where accident occurred or occupational disease was contracted: Kansas City, Jackson County, Missouri
6. Was above employee in employ of above employer at time of alleged accident or occupational disease? Yes
7. Did employer receive proper notice? Yes
8. Did accident or occupational disease arise out of and in the course of the employment? Yes
9. Was claim for compensation filed within time required by Law? Yes
10. Was employer insured by above insurer? Yes
11. Describe work employee was doing and how accident occurred or occupational disease contracted: Employee was attempting to open a door that was stuck and injured his neck, left shoulder, left arm and mental and emotional psyche.
12. Did accident or occupational disease cause death? No Date of death? N/A
13. Part(s) of body injured by accident or occupational disease: Neck, left shoulder, left arm and mental and emotional psyche.
14. Nature and extent of any permanent disability: Permanent and total disability.
15. Compensation paid to-date for temporary disability: None.

Issued by DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION Employee: Billy B. Williams

1. Value necessary medical aid paid to date by employer/insurer? $\ 9,683.21.
2. Value necessary medical aid not furnished by employer/insurer? N/A
3. Employee's average weekly wages: $\ 1,200.00 per week.
4. Weekly compensation rate: $\$ 662.55 / 347.05$.
5. Method wages computation: Stipulated
6. Amount of compensation payable: The Employer is liable for Permanent Total Disability benefits in the amount of $\ 662.55 per week beginning October 29, 2004.
7. Second Injury Fund liability: None.
8. Future requirements awarded: Medical treatment to cure and relieve the Employee from the effects of the work injury of December 26, 2003 to his mental and emotional psyche.

Said payments to begin as of date of this award and to be payable and be subject to modification and review as provided by law.

Employee: Billy B. Williams

Injury No: 03-136275

Dependents: N/A

Employer: City of Kansas City, Missouri

Additional Party: Treasurer of the State of Missouri as the Custodian of the Second Injury Fund

Insurer: Self-Insured

Hearing Date: October 30, 2009

On October 30, 2009, the employee, the employer and the Second Injury Fund appeared for a final hearing. The employee, Billy B. Williams, appeared in person and with counsel, Frank D. Eppright. The employer, City of Kansas City, Missouri, appeared through counsel, Anthony Bush. The Second Injury Fund was represented by Benita Seliga.

The parties stipulated that:

1. That on or about December 26, 2003 (the injury date), the City of Kansas City, Missouri (the employer) was an employer operating under and subject to Missouri's Workers' Compensation law with the right to self-insure.
2. That Billy B. Williams (the employee) was the employer's employee, working subject to the workers compensation law of the State of Missouri on December 26, 2003.
3. That the employee's average weekly wage on December 26, 2003 was $\ 1,200.00 per week with compensation rates of $\$ 662.55 / \ 347.05. The employer has paid $\ 9,683.21 in medical expenses and no temporary total disability benefits.
4. That Mr. Williams filed his claim within the time allowed by law and gave proper notice.

The parties requested the Division to determine:

1. If employee was injured in the course and scope of his employment?
2. What, if any, is the nature and extent of disability sustained by the employee as a result of the work injury of December 26, 2003 ?
3. Whether the employee is entitled to future medical treatment as a result of his work-related injury?

Billy B. Williams testified on his own behalf. In addition, Mr. Williams presented the following exhibits, all of which were admitted into evidence without objection:

Exhibit A - 10/21/06 Report, Dr. P. Brent Koprivica (\#1-17),

Exhibit B - 09/03/08 Addendum Report of Dr. P. Brent Koprivica (\#1-2)

Exhibit C - 02/22/09 Addendum Report of Dr. P. Brent Koprivica (\#1-6)

Exhibit D - 10/23/07 Report of Dr. Allan Schmidt, Ph.D. (\#1-6)

Exhibit E - Deposition of Mary Titterington taken 08/11/09 along with Deposition Exhibits. 1-3 (\#1-1173)

Exhibit F - 07/15/04 e-mail from Billy Williams to Bruce Williams

Exhibit G - 07/26/04 e-mail from Billy Williams to Bruce Williams

Exhibit H - 07/27/04 e-mail from Bruce Williams to Billy Williams

Exhibit I - 07/27/04 e-mail from Bruce Williams to Billy Williams

Exhibit J - 07/28/04 e-mail from Billy Williams to Bruce Williams

Exhibit K - 07/28/04 e-mail from Brandi Manning to Billy Williams

Exhibit L - 08/05/04 e-mail from Billy Williams to Bruce Williams

Exhibit M - Current Complaints

The employer presented no live evidence, however, it offered the following exhibits which were admitted into evidence without objection on the part of the employee:

Exhibit 1 - Dr. Pratt Report \& Curriculum Vitae

Exhibit 2 - 9-21-09 IME of Dr. Hughes

Exhibit 3 - 3-16-05 Report of Dr. Tung

Exhibit 4 - 1-30-04 Report of Dr. Stepp

Exhibit 5 - Work Ability Report

Exhibit 6 - MRI Report

The Second Injury Fund objected to the admissibility of Exhibits $1 \& 2$ and its objection was sustained.

Billy B. Williams is a 61 year old gentleman who worked for the City of Kansas City, Missouri Water Department for 28 years until October 28, 2004 when he took a retirement from the City. The position from which he retired after working his way up from an entry level position was that of Area Superintendent of the Water Department.

On December 26, 2003 the employee sustained an injury to his neck and left shoulder while in the scope and course of his employment as an Area Superintendent for the City's Water Department. The employee was attempting to open a metal door that was stuck and in so doing injured his neck and left shoulder. Thereafter, he felt pain in his neck and left shoulder. After reporting the accident to his supervisor, he was sent to Emergency Health Services (EHS) where he was given physical therapy, Percocet and sent to Baptist Lutheran Medical Center for MRIs of the neck and left shoulder. The MRI of employee's neck revealed a central hard disk protrusion at C3-4 which effaced the ventral aspect of the thecal sac, a central hard disc protrusion at C4-5 with mild deformity of the spinal cord and large disc protrusion at C6-7 involving the left paracentral region extending into the neural foramina with nerve root impingement. The rest of the MRI was unremarkable. The left shoulder MRI revealed changes consistent with tendinopathy or partial tear within the supraspinatus tendon but no evidence of a full thickness tear with AC joint hypertrophy with impingement on the underlying tendon.

After the MRIs were taken, the employee was referred by the employer to Dr. Timothy Stepp, a neurosurgeon, on January 30, 2004. Dr. Stepp noted the physical therapy provided by EHS had not helped the employee's neck and left shoulder pain. He also noted the employee had a non work-related cyst on the base of his neck. Dr. Stepp's report notes the employee was having a left-sided C-7 radiculopathy which would be difficult to treat because of the cyst as well as the Coumadin (a blood thinner) employee was taking for a heart problem. Dr. Stepp encouraged the employee to continue his physical therapy.

The employer then transferred the employee's care to Dr. Terrence Pratt who first saw the employee on February 11, 2004. Dr. Pratt noted that Dr. Stepp had declined to do epidural injections because of the Coumadin the employee was taking for his heart condition. Dr. Pratt then prescribed a trial of therapeutic intervention including traction and active exercise; the Percocet was continued as well.

Dr. Pratt again saw the Employee on March 11, 2004. He noted the employee was not a good candidate for epidurals because of the Coumadin he was taking for a heart condition. Dr. Pratt recommended a referral to a pain management doctor at that time.

On May 6, 2004, the employee's care was transferred by the employer to Dr. Dan Hancock, a pain management specialist. He noted the employee was having severe pain in his neck and left shoulder, radiating into his left arm. Dr. Hancock did not want to do epidural

steroid injections because of the Coumadin. Instead Dr. Hancock prescribed Oxycontin, Oxycodone and Neurontin.

Dr. Hancock saw the employee on June 11, 2004 and noted that because he was taking Coumadin the only alternative, as far as treatment, was to manage the employee's pain pharmacologically.

On June 23, 2004 the employee had the non work-related cyst on his neck removed; and, its cost was paid for by his private insurance. The employee was seen again by Dr. Pratt on July 23, 2004 who referred him back to Dr. Hancock and suggested he had no further need to see him.

On July 15, 2004 the employee sent Bruce Williams, who was in charge of the employee's workers compensation case for the employer, the following e-mail:

Bruce, I spoke with Brandi Manning, she is sitting as the 'nurse', concerning my medical case that you are handling. Ms. Manning informed me that I have missed several scheduled doctor appointments. I have not missed any scheduled doctor appointments to the best of my knowledge. Ms. Manning also informed me that on one of the 'missed' appointments I was to receive a home therapy device. I recently received a call from Dr. Pratt's nurse who scheduled me for an appointment July 23, at 2:00pm. I will be there on that date. In addition, I spoke with Ms. Florene Bellows and made her aware of this situation. I am going to bring my file to Ms. Manning so that it may be updated. In the future I would like to keep all correspondence with you on Lotus Notes. (signed) Billy Williams Area Superintendent.

This was followed by another e-mail from t