Sam M. Simns v. The Pictsweet Company, et al.

Simns, 2025 TN WC App. 61 (Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board 2025) · Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board · December 16, 2025 · No. 2024-70-4328

Summary

The Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing Sam M. Simns’s workers’ compensation petition as untimely under the applicable statute of limitations. The Board concluded that the employee failed to present evidence showing a qualifying voluntary payment within the limitations period or establishing mental incapacity, and it waived arguments not adequately developed on appeal.

Court
Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board
Writing for the Court
Pele I. Godkin; Timothy W. Conner; Meredith B. Weaver
Jurisdiction
Tennessee Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board
Decision date
December 16, 2025
Docket number
2024-70-4328
Procedural posture
Employee appealed from an order of the Court of Workers' Compensation Claims granting the employer's motion for summary judgment and dismissing the petition for benefit determination with prejudice based on expiration of the statute of limitations.
Standard of review
Summary judgment is reviewed de novo. The evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, with all reasonable inferences drawn in that party's favor. Once the moving party properly supports a motion for summary judgment and negates an essential element of the claim, the burden of production shifts to the nonmoving party to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact.
Precedential value
Published decision of the Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board; certified as final.
Parties
Sam M. Simns v. The Pictsweet Company, et al.
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

workers compensationsummary judgmentstatute of limitationsappellate procedurewaiver

Practice areas

workers compensationemployment lawcivil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the trial court properly granted summary judgment when the employer established that Simns filed her petition for benefit determination more than one year after the last voluntary payment of benefits and Simns failed to show a genuine issue of material fact regarding a later qualifying payment.
  2. Whether Simns could rely on evidence or alleged payments that were not submitted to or considered by the trial court.
  3. Whether Simns waived any challenge to the trial court's finding that mental incapacity did not extend the filing period by failing to raise and develop that issue on appeal.

Holdings

  1. The employer negated an essential element of Simns's claim by establishing that the petition for benefit determination was filed more than one year after the last voluntary payment of benefits, and Simns failed to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact regarding the expiration of the limitations period.
  2. The Appeals Board could not consider evidence allegedly proving later payments when that evidence was not submitted to or considered by the trial court.
  3. An appellant waives an issue by failing to develop an argument supporting the contention or by presenting only a skeletal argument.

Key quotations

[i]t is not the role of the courts, trial or appellate, to research or construct a litigant’s case or arguments for him or her. (at 2)
where a party fails to develop an argument in support of his or her contention or merely constructs a skeletal argument, the issue is waived. (at 2)

Factual background

Simns alleged that she injured her right shoulder and mid-low back while stacking packaged-food boxes on an assembly line on June 22, 2022. The employer authorized medical treatment on June 27, 2022 and paid for that treatment on August 5, 2022, but the record contained no evidence that it authorized or paid for additional treatment related to this claim. Simns filed her petition for benefit determination on June 21, 2024 and asserted that later medical payments and mental incapacity extended the filing period, but she presented no admissible evidence supporting either contention.

Procedural history

Simns filed a petition for benefit determination on June 21, 2024 concerning an alleged June 2022 work injury. The trial court denied the employer's motion to dismiss because resolution of the limitations issue required consideration of evidence beyond the pleadings, but later granted summary judgment after finding that the employer's last voluntary payment related to the claim was made on August 5, 2022 and that Simns offered no evidence establishing a later qualifying payment or mental incapacity. Simns appealed without filing a brief or transcript of the hearing, and the Appeals Board affirmed and certified the decision as final.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…