LEWIS W. NYEMA, Employee/Appellant, v. BROWN TANK, LLC, and ZURICH N. AM., Employer-Insurer/Respondents.

The employee has appealed from the compensation judge’s determination that his work injury of April 20, 2015, was temporary and had resolved by July 6, 2015. We affirm the decision of the compensation judge.

Mr. Nyema began working for the employer as a welder in January 2014. On April 20, 2015, Mr. Nyema was building a large metal storage tank at a work site in Tennessee. While he was working on the ground inside the tank, a steel ladder fell about 12-20 feet and struck him on the head, right shoulder, and right hand. Mr. Nyema was wearing a hardhat and was not knocked to the ground and did not lose consciousness.

Mr. Nyema drove himself to an urgent care facility at TriStar Health in Nashville and reported dizziness, nausea, blurred vision, and mental slowing in addition to burning right shoulder pain, tingling and swelling in his right hand. Mr. Nyema was sent to Centennial Health Center for hand and shoulder x-rays and CT scans of the head. All radiographic studies were read as normal. After his discharge from the health care center, Mr. Nyema returned to work for the rest of the week. He then drove himself back to Minnesota.

After he returned to Minnesota, Mr. Nyema saw Dr. Molly Bird at Health Source Chiropractic. Mr. Nyema reported to Dr. Bird that he had neck, low back, right shoulder, and hand pain. Mr. Nyema reported his pain was at a level of 10 plus out of 10. Dr. Bird provided chiropractic adjustments on the spine and took the employee off work. Mr. Nyema also saw Dr. Sue Mollner at Allina West Health on May 22, 2015, with headache symptoms and dizziness. He was diagnosed with post-concussion syndrome and was prescribed Tylenol.

The employer and insurer accepted liability for the work injury and began paying wage loss and medical expenses.

At the request of the employer and insurer, Mr. Nyema was evaluated by Dr. Khalafalla Bushara on July 6, 2015. Dr. Bushara took a medical history from the employee, reviewed his medical records, and conducted a physical examination. Mr. Nyema complained of neck pain that he rated at 10 out of 10 and headaches that he associated with neck pain that occurred three or four times a week. The employee reported low back pain that he rated at 8/10. The examination was normal, although the employee complained of pain when he moved his head. Dr. Bushara found no cervical spasm or any other objective sign of injury. Dr. Bushara concluded that the work injury caused myoligamentous sprain/strain injuries that were temporary and had since resolved. He further stated that Mr. Nyema needed no further medical care or work restrictions. Dr. Bushara opined that prescriptions, physical therapy, and chiropractic care after six weeks following the work injury were not warranted.

Dr. Mollner referred Mr. Nyema to Dr. Chad Evans at Noran Neurological Clinic. Dr. Evans saw Mr. Nyema on July 28, 2015.^[1] Mr. Nyema told Dr. Evans that he had headaches three times a week and that his right arm had been painful since the injury. Dr. Evans diagnosed “myoligamentous/soft tissue injury” affecting the cervical and upper thoracic spine. Dr. Evans also diagnosed “post concussive headaches.” Dr. Evans recommended MRI scans of the head and neck. The scans were done on August 3, 2015, and were read as normal. Mr. Nyema continued to treat at the Noran Clinic and with Dr. Mollner. He also remained off work.

Dr. Bushara saw Mr. Nyema again on November 10, 2015, and in his report of December 14, 2015, Dr. Bushara reiterated his previous opinion that the employee’s April 20, 2015, injury had resolved with no residuals.

The employer and insurer filed a petition to discontinue benefits on November 9, 2015. The petition was heard by Compensation Judge Kirsten Tate on January 10, 2016. Judge Tate issued her Findings and Order on February 5, 2016, and granted the petition to discontinue. The compensation judge found the employer’s injury “was temporary and fully resolved no later than July 6, 2015.” The employee, now pro se, has appealed.

Mr. Nyema raises two issues in his appeal to this court.

In his first issue, the employee refers to the photograph of a steel ladder which was introduced as employer’s exhibit 1. Mr. Nyema states that the ladder shown in the photograph was smaller than the one that struck him and the photograph would suggest that his injury could not have been as serious as he reports.

In his testimony, however, Mr. Nyema was asked for details about the ladder that struck him. He testified that it was larger and heavier than the ladder in the photograph. He stated that it was “pretty heavy” and weighed approximately 100 pounds. (T. 61-63). Mr. Nyema’s testimony about the dimensions and weight of the ladder were contradicted by the testimony of a supervisor from Brown Tank. Given the testimony of the witnesses, we conclude that admission of the photograph was not prejudicial error.

We also add that there was no dispute as to whether Mr. Nyema was struck by a falling ladder on the job in Tennessee on April 20, 2015. The employer and insurer have always conceded that fact. The questions for the compensation judge in this case were whether the injury continued to disable the employee from work and whether the employee continued to need medical and chiropractic care as a result of that injury.

As the findings and memorandum make clear, in answering those questions the compensation judge considered the testimony of Mr. Nyema and the testimony of Mark Oakes, a supervisor at Brown Tank. She also reviewed and considered the medical records and opinions of the employee’s treating doctors and the opinion of Dr. Bushara.

The compensation judge provided detailed findings based on her review of the evidence. She noted that after the injury the employee was able to go back to work for the rest of the week and then drive himself from Tennessee to Minnesota. The compensation judge referred to the employee’s medical treatment in which the employee’s complaints and were not substantiated by objective findings or radiographic testing. Finally the compensation judge cited the lack of any improvement over a period of months despite the employee being off work and receiving a significant amount of medical and chiropractic care. Based on her review and consideration of the evidence, the compensation judge granted the petition to discontinue benefits filed by the employer and insurer.

Mr. Nyema argues in his appeal that the compensation judge should have accepted the opinions of his treating doctors over the opinion of Dr. Bushara. However, Dr. Bushara had examined the employee and had reviewed his medical records. He had adequate information to provide an opinion and it is the job of a compensation judge to consider conflicts in the evidence, including medical opinions, and make a determination after doing so. The compensation judge’s decision is based on substantial evidence and we affirm her decision.