Marcus Leavelle v. RCT Memphis TN PC, et al.

2025 TN WC App. 58 · Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board · November 19, 2025 · No. 2022-08-0109

Summary

The Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board denied the employee’s motion to dismiss the employer’s appeal as untimely, holding that a post-trial motion to amend extended the appellate deadline and did not limit the issues that could be raised. The Board affirmed the trial court’s decision to credit the treating orthopedic surgeon’s causation and impairment opinions over those of another physician. It also rejected the employer’s argument that a subsequent hoverboard incident constituted an independent intervening event defeating compensability.

Court
Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
Writing for the Court
Timothy W. Conner; Pele I. Godkin; Meredith B. Weaver
Jurisdiction
Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board
Decision date
November 19, 2025
Docket number
2022-08-0109
Procedural posture
Employer appealed the Court of Workers' Compensation Claims' compensation order, as amended, challenging the trial court's weighing of competing medical opinions and its treatment of an alleged intervening hoverboard incident. Employee moved to dismiss the appeal as untimely.
Standard of review
Factual findings are presumed correct unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise, with considerable deference given to findings based on in-court testimony. Findings based on documentary evidence are reviewed without similar deference; statutory and regulatory interpretation is reviewed de novo with no presumption of correctness. A trial court's choice among competing expert medical opinions is reviewed for abuse of discretion, while the evidence as a whole is considered to determine whether the preponderance of the evidence shows such an abuse.
Precedential value
Published opinion
Parties
RCT Memphis TN PC v. Marcus Leavelle
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

workers compensationappellate procedurestandard of reviewevidence

Practice areas

workers compensationemployment lawappellate procedureevidence

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the employer's notice of appeal was timely when filed after the trial court ruled on a post-trial motion to amend the compensation order.
  2. Whether the trial court erred by crediting Dr. Bernholt's opinions over those of Dr. Goodfred regarding causation and impairment.
  3. Whether the trial court improperly disregarded evidence of an independent intervening hoverboard incident.

Holdings

  1. A post-trial motion properly treated under Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 52.02 or 59.04 extends the time for taking steps in the appellate process under Rule 59.01, and the resulting notice of appeal is not limited to issues addressed only in the post-trial order.
  2. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by crediting Dr. Bernholt's opinions over Dr. Goodfred's opinions on causation and impairment.
  3. The trial court did not err by finding that the hoverboard incident did not defeat or permanently alter the compensability of Leavelle's work-related knee injury.

Key quotations

Whether this appeal was timely depends on the type of motion filed after the entry of the trial court’s compensation order. In making that determination, the court will look to the substance rather than form. (7)
We conclude that, at most, the evidence addressing the subsequent event could reasonably support a finding that Employee’s left knee symptoms were temporarily exacerbated by the hoverboard incident. (10)

Factual background

Leavelle reported injuring his left knee at work on December 1, 2021, when he felt a pop while hopping down from a trailer. Initial treatment identified swelling and limited motion, and an MRI showed joint effusion but no meniscal or ligament injury. A later orthopedic evaluation and surgery revealed a full-thickness chondral lesion and a medial meniscus tear; the treating orthopedic surgeon attributed the condition primarily to the work injury and assigned a two-percent permanent impairment rating. Several weeks after the work accident, Leavelle's daughter accidentally struck his knee with a hoverboard, but the medical evidence did not establish that the event permanently aggravated or materially advanced the work-related injury.

Procedural history

The Court of Workers' Compensation Claims issued a compensation order on April 8, 2025, awarding permanent and temporary disability benefits, medical expenses, and related relief to Leavelle. The court later amended the order regarding payment of attorney fees and granted in part Leavelle's motion for discretionary costs. Employer filed its notice of appeal on August 6, 2025, and Leavelle moved to dismiss. The Appeals Board denied the motion to dismiss, affirmed the trial court's orders, and certified the amended compensation order as final.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…