Meener, Musshur v. Federal Express Hub

FILED
Jan 21, 2026
08:16 AM(CT)
TENNESSEE
WORKERS' COMPENSATION
APPEALS BOARD

TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD

Musshur Meener Docket No. 2025-80-0048

v. State File No. 84369-2024

Federal Express Hub, et al.

Appeal from the Court of Workers’
Compensation Claims
Shaterra R. Marion, Judge

Affirmed and Remanded

In this interlocutory appeal, the employee questions the trial court’s order denying his
request for additional medical and temporary disability benefits. The employee suffered
compensable injuries in a fall and received authorized medical benefits. The authorized
physicians assigned work restrictions, which the employer’s representative testified could
have been accommodated had the employee returned to work. After an expedited hearing,
the trial court found the employee had not provided sufficient evidence to establish that he
will likely prevail at trial and denied the employee’s request for additional benefits. The
employee has appealed. Having carefully reviewed the record, we affirm the trial court’s
decision and remand the case.

Presiding Judge Timothy W. Conner delivered the opinion of the Appeals Board in which
Judge Pele I. Godkin and Judge Meredith B. Weaver joined.

Musshur Meener, Euless, Texas, employee-appellant, pro se

Joseph B. Baker, Memphis, Tennessee, for the employer-appellee, Federal Express Hub

Memorandum Opinion 1

On November 17, 2024, Musshur Meener (“Employee”) was loading a truck in the
course of his employment as a seasonal worker at Federal Express Hub (“Employer”) when
he stepped on a cargo roller and slipped and fell. As a result of the fall, he alleged injuries
to his neck and shoulder, and Employer provided authorized medical treatment with panel-

1
This decision is being filed pursuant to Tenn. Comp. R. and Regs. 0800-02-22-.03(1) (2023).

1
selected providers, first with a physician at an urgent care clinic and then with Dr. John
Brophy, a neurosurgeon. Those physicians assigned work restrictions that limited
Employee’s ability to lift, twist, and turn. Employer offered Employee a position that it
asserted complied with the recommended restrictions, and, although Employee initially
accepted the offer of light duty work, he did not return to work for Employer.

In a series of motions and, ultimately, a request for an expedited hearing, Employee
sought additional medical treatment, temporary disability benefits, and mileage
reimbursement. 2 Although Employee’s arguments are difficult to ascertain, he appears to
have argued that Employer would not have been able to accommodate the medical
restrictions assigned by his physicians and that, as a result, he is entitled to additional
temporary disability benefits regardless of whether he actually returned or attempted to
return to work.

With respect to the claim for additional temporary disability benefits, Employer’s
safety specialist testified at the expedited hearing that Employer would have been able to
accommodate the restrictions assigned by the authorized providers, and no evidence was
presented to the contrary. With respect to the claim for additional medical treatment,
Employer maintained that it did not owe any additional benefits, as Dr. Brophy, the
authorized physician, had placed Employee at maximum medical improvement (“MMI”)
with no impairment or restrictions. Employer also relied on Dr. Brophy’s opinion that
Employee’s current complaints and need for treatment were not primarily caused by the
work accident.

Following the expedited hearing, the trial court found that, although there is no
dispute that Employee fell at work and suffered a strain/sprain injury, Employee had not
presented sufficient evidence to establish he will likely prevail at a hearing on the merits
in proving his entitlement to the additional benefits he is requesting. Specifically, the court
observed that Employee had not presented any medical proof that his current symptoms
and need for medical treatment are causally related to the work-related accident. The court
also found that, given Employer’s testimony that it could have accommodated Employee’s
restrictions had he returned to work, Employee did not establish an entitlement to
additional disability benefits. Employee has appealed.

On his notice of appeal, Employee states, “denied benefit for [relief] temporary
disability and medical benefit workers’ compensation 66.3 medical bill.” His brief on
appeal reiterates his belief that he is unable to work and that he is entitled to temporary
disability benefits. Employer, for its part, maintains in its appellate brief that it has

2
The procedural history of this claim is long and contentious, including discovery disputes requiring court
orders and a previous appeal. Our discussion includes only the history relevant to the issues presented in
this appeal.
2
provided all workers’ compensation benefits to which Employee is entitled pursuant to
Tennessee’s Workers’ Compensation Law.

It is well settled that the employee in a workers’ compensation case bears the burden
of proving all essential elements of his claim, even at an interlocutory stage of the case.
See Scott v. Integrity Staffing Solutions, No. 2015-05-0055, 2015 TN Wrk. Comp. App.
Bd. LEXIS 24, at *6 (Tenn. Workers’ Comp. App. Bd. Aug. 18, 2015). Although an
employee need only prove a likelihood of prevailing at trial to secure benefits at an
interlocutory hearing, the employee must still come forward with sufficient evidence to
convince the trial court that he or she is likely to prove entitlement to additional benefits at
trial. Thomas v. Zipp Express, No. 2015-06-0546, 2016 TN Wrk. Comp. App. Bd. LEXIS
35, at *10 (Tenn. Workers’ Comp. App. Bd. Aug. 2, 2016). Here, it was Employee’s
burden to come forward with sufficient evidence to convince the court he is likely to prevail
at trial in proving his entitlement to the requested benefits. However, he has provided no
legal authority or admissible evidence in support of his request. His authorized physician
released him at MMI with no impairment and no restrictions and opined that any current
need for treatment is not causally related to the work injury. Employee acknowledged
during cross-examination at the expedited hearing that he did not have a physician’s
opinion taking him out of work. Further, we agree with the trial court that Employee has
presented no evidence to establish he was entitled to additional temporary disability
benefits given Employer’s unrefuted offer to accommodate Employee’s restrictions.

In sum, Employee has not met his burden of proof in establishing that he will likely
prevail in proving that his current complaints and alleged need for medical treatment are
primarily caused by the work injury. He has also not met his burden of establishing an
entitlement to additional temporary disability benefits based on the evidence presented at
the expedited hearing. See Long v. Mid-Tenn. Ford Truck Sales, Inc., 160 S.W.3d 504,
511 (Tenn. 2005). Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the trial court and remand the
case. Costs on appeal have been waived.

3
TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION
WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD

Musshur Meener Docket No. 2025-80-0048

v. State File No. 84369-2024

Federal Express Hub, et al.

Appeal from the Court of Workers’
Compensation Claims
Shaterra R. Marion, Judge

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the Appeals Board’s decision in the referenced case
was sent to the following recipients by the following methods of service on this the 21st day of
January, 2026.

Name Certified First Class Via Via Sent to:
Mail Mail Fax Email
Musshur Meener X musshurfragranceworld@gmail.com
Joseph B. Baker X jbaker@mckuhn.com
mdoherty@mckuhn.com
Shaterra R. Marion, Judge X Via Electronic Mail
Kenneth M. Switzer, Chief Judge X Via Electronic Mail
Penny Shrum, Clerk, Court of X penny.patterson-shrum@tn.gov
Workers’ Compensation Claims

Olivia Yearwood
Clerk, Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board
220 French Landing Dr., Ste. 1-B
Nashville, TN 37243
Telephone: 615-253-1606
Electronic Mail: WCAppeals.Clerk@tn.gov