Audrey A. Headrick

The case involved Sarah Bivens, a receptionist at Acadia Healthcare Management, Inc., who sought workers' compensation benefits after tripping and falling in a hallway at work on April 22, 2025, resulting in a head injury and knee fracture requiring surgery. The employer denied the claim, arguing the fall was idiopathic with no work-related hazard, supported by video footage showing a level floor. The court denied the request for benefits at the expedited hearing stage, finding that Bivens failed to provide evidence beyond her assertion that the floor was uneven, as the video indicated no visible hazard, making it unlikely she would prevail on the merits under Tennessee workers' compensation law.

labor & employmentprocedure

This case involves a workers' compensation claim by Terry Painter against his employer Hollingshead Development, LLC, and its insurer, stemming from a 2024 workplace fall that caused a right hip fracture. Painter sought a court order authorizing evaluation by a specific hip specialist, Dr. Mark Freeman, and additional temporary disability benefits starting in May 2025. The court denied both requests, holding that Painter failed to establish a likelihood of prevailing on the merits. The ruling rested on findings that the employer properly offered a panel of specialists which Painter did not select from, that treating physician Dr. Yee had released him without restrictions and placed him at maximum medical improvement, and that no medical evidence supported ongoing disability benefits.

labor & employment

Mr. Hudson, a truck driver employed by Coca Cola, injured his right hip on the job in January 2024 when stepping off a ladder, leading the employer to accept the claim and authorize a hip replacement performed by Dr. Grebner in March 2025. He later sought authorization for left-hip treatment, asserting that rehabilitation from the right-hip surgery had aggravated a preexisting avascular necrosis condition in his left hip. The court denied the request for left-hip benefits, holding that Mr. Hudson failed to show a likelihood of prevailing on the merits. Under Tennessee workers' compensation law, an employee must prove to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that the work injury contributed more than 50 percent in causing the need for treatment, but Dr. Grebner's testimony used only speculative terms such as "could have" and "possibly," which did not satisfy the statutory standard.

labor & employment

This case from the Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims involved employee Hunter Meadows's request for an order authorizing all future medical treatment and paying temporary disability benefits starting November 2025 after a July 2025 workplace injury to his head, knees, back, hip, and foot while operating heavy equipment. The employer, Brown Bros., Inc., had accepted the claim, provided a panel leading to treatment by Dr. Sass, and recently offered specialist panels, but disputed the benefits. The court denied the requests, holding that Meadows failed to prove a likelihood of prevailing because no records showed a physician took him off work or that his earnings decreased on restricted duty, he had been working at a higher wage for a new employer since October 2025, and an order on all future treatment would be an improper advisory opinion. The court referred the matter to the Compliance Program for penalties due to the employer's delay in reporting the injury and offering a panel.

labor & employment

This case concerned a workers' compensation claim filed by Frederick Whitson against Express Employment Professionals after he fell and injured his shoulder and wrist at work on August 13, 2024. The employer made its last voluntary payment on September 23, 2024, but Whitson did not file his petition until October 29, 2025. The Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims granted the employer's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the claim, finding it time-barred under the statute requiring petitions to be filed within one year of the employer's last payment, as the undisputed evidence negated an essential element of timely filing.

labor & employmentprocedure

This case involved a workers' compensation claim by employee Markus Valentine against employer Volkswagen of America, Inc., following a June 2024 back injury from pushing heavy racks at work. Volkswagen accepted compensability for a thoracic spine strain but denied further benefits, including for thoracic spondylosis and a cervical condition that required surgery, citing lack of medical causation. The court denied Valentine's requests for a neutral physician appointment and additional temporary disability benefits. The core reasoning was that Valentine failed to prove by a reasonable degree of medical certainty that the work injury caused more than 50% of his ongoing thoracic or cervical conditions, as the authorized treating physicians found the thoracic sprain resolved at maximum medical improvement and no causation for the cervical issues or need for surgery.

labor & employment

In this workers' compensation case, employee Timothy W. Pinkham alleged that he suffered a right shoulder injury on August 9, 2025, while climbing into his truck at work for Davis Enterprises of Tennessee, LLC. The employer denied the claim for lack of medical causation. The court denied Pinkham's request for benefits, including a second medical opinion or appointment of a neutral physician, because the panel-selected physician, Dr. Hutcheson, opined that the injury was not primarily caused by the work incident and this opinion was unrebutted. Pinkham failed to show he was likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits under the applicable standard requiring the work incident to contribute more than 50% to the need for treatment.

labor & employment

This case involved Devontay Craig's claim for workers' compensation benefits against his employer Shimmick Construction Co., Inc., for a right leg injury he alleged occurred while working on June 21, 2021. After the employer denied the claim based on a doctor's opinion that the injury was not work-related, Craig filed an initial petition but failed to request a hearing within the required time, leading to a dismissal without prejudice in January 2022. Craig filed a second petition in March 2023, but the court granted the employer's motion for summary judgment, ruling that the claim was barred by the one-year statute of limitations under Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-203(b)(2), as the last benefit payment was made on October 25, 2021, making the deadline October 25, 2022. The court found no genuine issue of material fact and dismissed the claim with prejudice.

labor & employmentprocedure

In Owens v. Sitters, Etc., employee Sheila Owens sought workers' compensation benefits claiming permanent and total disability from a June 2015 workplace accident that injured her neck, left shoulder, and low back while working as a nursing assistant. The employer accepted the shoulder and back injuries as compensable but disputed the neck injury on grounds of untimely notice and lack of compensability, attributing it primarily to pre-existing degeneration. The court held that Owens was permanently and totally disabled and awarded additional temporary disability benefits along with medical benefits for the neck injury. This ruling rested on medical evidence from treating physicians, including testimony that the neck condition at C3-4 was proximately caused by the work incident or an aggravation of a pre-existing condition, which outweighed contrary opinions from the employer's examiner.

labor & employment

In this workers' compensation case, employee Sherry Cain sought permanent partial disability benefits after suffering deep vein thrombosis and thoracic outlet syndrome from repetitive lifting at Volkswagen of America. She relied on a 15% impairment rating from the Medical Impairment Rating Registry physician, while the employer presented an independent medical evaluation assigning only a 2% rating and argued it rebutted the statutory presumption of accuracy. The court determined that Volkswagen did not meet the burden of showing clear and convincing evidence to overcome the Registry rating's presumption. Accordingly, the court awarded benefits based on the 15% rating. The decision turned on the statutory framework governing the weight given to Registry physicians in disputed impairment cases.

labor & employment

The case involved an employee, Adelino Cintron, who suffered a work-related back injury in November 2020 and later reported symptoms including numbness and weakness in his hands, leading his authorized treating physician Dr. David Lowry to refer him to hand specialist Dr. Peter Lund for evaluation of carpal tunnel syndrome. The employer Wheeler Technologies, LLC denied the request, asserting the carpal tunnel syndrome was not causally related to the work injury. The court decided that Cintron was entitled to see Dr. Lund for an evaluation and ordered the employer to authorize it. The core reasoning was that treatment recommended by a panel physician is statutorily presumed medically necessary, the employer failed to respond to the direct referral within three business days as required, and at this expedited stage the employee need only show he is likely to prevail on the validity of the referral rather than prove causation.

labor & employment

In this workers' compensation case, employee Jeannette Melton sought an order requiring her employer Amazon.com Services, LLC, to provide a panel of physicians in New Orleans, Louisiana, after sustaining a work-related head injury in 2020 from a falling box that caused a concussion and persistent symptoms. The court decided that Melton was entitled to the panel in her new community. The core reasoning was that Melton showed she was likely to prevail at a hearing on the merits for additional medical benefits, as the opinion of her treating neurologist—who examined her for nearly a year—was more persuasive than a later records-review evaluation by another physician that questioned the ongoing work-related causation. The court also noted Amazon's duty to provide appropriate out-of-state care under Tennessee rules, including potential waivers of the medical fee schedule.

labor & employment

Mr. Burwick, an Amazon employee, sought workers' compensation benefits for facial and neurological injuries after fainting and falling while loading packages into unairconditioned trailers on a hot day. Amazon denied the claim, asserting the episode was an idiopathic seizure from his pre-existing medical history and did not arise out of employment. After an expedited hearing, the court held that Burwick is likely to prevail at trial on his requests for medical and temporary disability benefits. The decision rested on medical opinions from treating physicians linking the syncopal event to dehydration and heat exposure during work, outweighing contrary views from the employer's expert.

labor & employment

This case involved an employee, Lawrence Mitchell, who sought workers' compensation benefits from his employer, Waupaca Foundry, Inc., after reporting right-sided neck pain in August 2018. The court considered the employer's motion for summary judgment, which was supported by medical opinions indicating that Mitchell's cervical issues and shoulder symptoms were primarily degenerative and not work-related, with only a cervical strain qualifying for benefits; doctors assigned a 5% impairment rating and noted an overpayment of temporary benefits. Mitchell did not submit a compliant response with specific facts to dispute the evidence. The court granted the motion, holding there was no genuine issue of material fact and awarding permanent partial disability benefits of $8,125.59 after applying a credit for overpaid temporary benefits, plus lifetime future medical benefits under Tennessee law. The decision relied on the requirements of Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and the insufficiency of Mitchell's evidence to support a greater award.

labor & employment

The case involved employee Anthony McCarroll, Jr.'s claim for workers' compensation benefits from employer Amazon.com after he alleged a head injury from a falling box on August 29, 2019. Amazon provided some benefits but last paid on December 23, 2019, and McCarroll filed his petition on January 15, 2021. The court granted Amazon's motion for summary judgment, holding the claim time-barred under Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-203(b)(2), which requires a petition within one year after the employer ceases voluntary payments. The undisputed facts showed the filing was untimely, and McCarroll did not raise any genuine issue of material fact regarding the limitations period.

labor & employmentprocedure

The case involved an Amazon employee, Marie Bailey, who injured her right hand at work on November 15, 2020, and sought medical and temporary disability benefits under workers' compensation. Amazon denied the claim citing medical noncompliance after Bailey missed two doctor appointments, though she later attended treatment and received a diagnosis of a work-related contusion. The court held that Bailey was entitled to medical benefits but not temporary disability benefits. The reasoning was that Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-204(d)(8) permits suspension of compensation for noncompliance with reasonable medical requests but does not authorize termination of the claim or denial of medical care, and Bailey met her burden to show likely success on medical benefits at a full hearing.

labor & employment

This case involved a workers' compensation claim by employee Meagan Mueller-Rice against her uninsured employer, MEDATAG, Inc. d/b/a Poblanos Mexican Cuisine, for a left knee injury she sustained on September 30, 2017, when she tripped over a dog leash while serving customers. The employer did not appear at the compensation hearing and had not provided a medical panel or any benefits after the injury was reported. The court awarded medical benefits for reasonable and necessary treatment, including emergency care, diagnostics, physical therapy, and follow-up, plus temporary disability benefits for time off work, but denied permanent disability benefits because the authorized physician assigned no permanent impairment rating and placed her at maximum medical improvement without restrictions. The decision rested on the employee's uncontroverted proof of a work-related injury, the employer's failure to comply with statutory obligations to provide treatment, and the medical evidence showing the need for care but no lasting impairment.

labor & employment

The case involved an employee's claim for workers' compensation benefits for a left-shoulder injury allegedly caused by lifting a box at Amazon, which the employer disputed based on evidence of a prior fall at home three days earlier. The court held a compensation hearing and determined that the employee was not entitled to benefits. The core reasoning centered on credibility findings: medical records and admissions showed the employee complained of left-shoulder pain after the home fall but denied it at hearing, she failed to disclose the fall to treating physicians, and a co-worker testified she admitted claiming a work injury from the home incident. Due to these inconsistencies and the lack of credible evidence linking the injury to the workplace, the claim was denied.

labor & employment

Frances Conn filed a workers' compensation claim against Amazon alleging bilateral hand, wrist, and shoulder pain from repetitive motions during several months working as a packer and stower. Two examining physicians offered conflicting causation opinions: the panel-selected primary care doctor concluded that more than 50.1 percent of the cause was not work-related, while the second doctor attributed the diagnoses of epicondylitis and trapezius strain to increased activity at Amazon. Under Tennessee law, an employee must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that employment contributed more than fifty percent to causing a cumulative trauma injury, and the opinion of a panel-selected physician is presumed correct unless rebutted. The court held that Conn did not overcome that presumption and therefore denied her claim for medical benefits.

labor & employment

This workers' compensation case involved employee Denise Lewallen, who was injured in a February 2018 motor vehicle accident while working for Home Healthcare of East Tennessee and sought permanent total disability benefits along with treatment for a disputed hernia and alleged mental injury. The employer contested the extent of disability, the compensability of certain conditions, and additional temporary benefits, while claiming credit for benefits already paid. After reviewing medical evidence including surgeries, functional capacity evaluations, and physician testimony from Drs. Smith and Kennedy, the court awarded permanent total disability benefits based on permanent restrictions that prevented Lewallen from performing her pre-injury occupation as a home health worker. The court denied benefits for the hernia and mental injury claims and resolved disputes over impairment ratings by adopting a higher whole-person rating that accounted for all injuries.

labor & employmenthealthcare