The Supreme Court of Tennessee affirmed the decision of Tennessee Workers' Compensation Appeals Board in denying an employee being awarded workers compensation due to failure to give timely notice and for failing to prove her employer had prior knowledge of the injury. The case is Ernstes v. Printpack, Inc., 2024 Tenn. LEXIS 1 (Tenn. 2024).
Arlene Ernstes worked for Printpack, Inc. for 33 years. She worked many positions during her employment, but spent a majority of her time on the plant floor where she worked amongst loud machinery. Printpack required employees to wear hearing protection gear and would provide hearing screenings annually.
Ernstes retired in 2016 and was unaware of any hearing loss. Following her retirement, she noticed hearing loss but assumed it was due to her age. An audiological exam conducted in 2019 revealed significant hearing loss, but she still did not connect it to her employment at the time. In September 2020, Ernstes went with her husband to a meeting with an attorney regarding her husband's employment-related hearing loss case and discussed her own hearing loss. On November 17, 2020, she filed a Petition for Benefit Determination with the Tennessee Bureau of Workers' Compensation based on hearing loss caused by noise exposure at Printpack.
During a compensation hearing on August 4, 2022, Ernstes said she always wore hearing protection, but at times the noise would still hurt her ears. She stated that the first time she connected her hearing loss to her employment was during the visit with her husband's attorney on his own hearing loss case. However, during a cross-examination, Ernstes said that during the 2019 audiological exam, she had not asked about the cause of hearing loss, as she knew it had to do with "all the loud noises."
Tenn. Code Ann. §50-6-201(b)(1) states that in cases involving gradual or cumulative injuries, the worker is required to provide notice of the injury within fifteen days after the employee knows or reasonably should know that they suffered a work-related injury that resulted in permanent physical impairment. This is known as the discovery rule.
The trial court judge explained that under the discovery rule, the statute of limitations in a gradually occurring injury case is suspended until it is discoverable that a compensable injury has been sustained. The judge concluded that Ernstes did not know her injury was work-related until she had the audiological exam in 2019, and thus the petition was not time-barred. The court awarded benefits including permanent partial disability and lifetime future medical expenses.
Printpack appealed the ruling on the basis that the trial court erred in finding that Ernstes provided them timely notice of a gradually occurring injury. Based on Ernstes's testimony of her audiological exam in 2019 where she said she knew her hearing loss was due to "the loud noises," the Appeals Board concluded that Ernstes failed to give timely notice of her injury. The Board then asked the trial court to consider other parts of the workers' compensation statutes that they previously hadn't considered–namely whether there was a reasonable excuse for failure to give notice, and whether Printpack was prejudiced by the late notice. On remand, the trial court concluded that Ernstes did not provide a reasonable excuse for her failure to give notice, but also that Printpack failed to show prejudice due to the late notice. Thus, the judge reinstated the benefits award.
On a second appeal, Printpack asserted that Ernstes's claim should have been barred by the statute of limitations. The workers compensation statute states that in cases where there is a lack of timely written notice, the employee has the burden of proving that: timely written notice was provided; the employer had knowledge of the accident or injury; or the employee had a reasonable excuse for the failure to provide timely written notice. Because none of those criteria were met, the Appeals Board reversed the trial court and dismissed the petition. The Supreme Court of Tennessee affirmed the judgment of the Appeals Board.
Editor's note: This case highlights the importance of adhering to notification requirements and other statutory requirements. The employee initially claimed that she made the connection of her hearing loss to her employment in September 2020 while talking to her husband's attorney. However, she later testified that she knew her hearing loss was related to her employment during an audiological exam in 2019. Tennessee law states that written notice must be given to the employer within 15 days of when the employee knew, or reasonably should have known, of the injury. Had the employee given prompt notice following the exam in 2019, she would have received workers compensation benefits.