CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. 2022-08-1404
Regular Panel Decision
Feb 23, 2026

BRITT, BREEAHNA v. CENTER FOR YOUTH MINISTRY TRAINING

Breeahna Britt, an employee, sought medical benefits for a head, neck, and upper-body injury, specifically requesting her physical therapist to be named as her authorized treating physician. The employer, Center for Youth Ministry Training, initially disputed the lack of a valid physician panel but later conceded, offering a Colorado neurologists' panel during the expedited hearing. The Court denied Ms. Britt's request for the physical therapist to be authorized, citing her failure to establish a doctor/patient relationship with a physician, specifically a neurologist. However, the Court affirmed Ms. Britt's entitlement to a new panel of neurologists in Colorado and referred the employer to the compliance program for penalties due to their delay in providing a valid panel.

Workers' CompensationMedical BenefitsPhysician PanelAuthorized Treating PhysicianEmployee RelocationEmployer ObligationNeurologyPenalty AssessmentExpedited HearingTennessee Law
References
3
Case No. ADJ7911474
Regular
Jan 22, 2019

KIA SPREWELL vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RICHARD J. DONOVAN CORRECTIONAL FACILITY

This case involved Kia Sprewell's workers' compensation claim against the Richard J. Donovan Correctional Facility for injuries sustained as an office assistant. The defendant sought reconsideration of the initial award, primarily contesting the commutation method for attorney fees and the substantiality of the neurologist's medical opinions. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration in part, affirming the award of permanent disability but amending the attorney fees to be commuted from the side of the life pension award. The Board found the neurologist's opinions on apportionment and rating of various injuries, including headaches and spinal issues, to be substantial medical evidence.

Workers Compensation Appeals BoardKia SprewellRichard J. Donovan Correctional FacilityState Compensation Insurance FundPetition for ReconsiderationFindings and AwardPermanent DisabilityApportionmentLife PensionAttorney Fees
References
0
Case No. ADJ8055062
Regular
May 28, 2013

JAIME CASTANEDA vs. KING DAHL EVENT DESIGN, STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND

This case involves a workers' compensation applicant seeking reconsideration of a prior award that found a $15\%$ permanent disability and no industrial injury to the psyche. The applicant argues the administrative law judge (WCJ) erred by not including a neurologist's impairment rating for a sleep disorder and by not relying on the primary treating physician's orthopedic assessment. The Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinded the original award, and returned the matter for the WCJ to incorporate the neurologist's sleep disorder impairment rating, finding it uncontradicted. However, one commissioner dissented, arguing the sleep disorder was secondary to pain already included in the orthopedic rating and any psychiatric component was noncompensable.

WCABReconsiderationFindings and AwardIndustrial InjuryPermanent DisabilityOrthopedistNeurologistSleep DisorderAMA GuidesImpairment Rating
References
1
Case No. 2022-08-1050
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 01, 2023

Yow, James v. Lowe’s Investment Corporation

James Yow, an employee, requested an expedited hearing after moving from Memphis to Pensacola, Florida, seeking a new panel of physicians for ongoing work-related injuries. Lowe's Investment Corporation, the self-insured employer, denied the request, arguing that previous authorized physicians anticipated no future treatment and the request was not ripe. The Court ruled in favor of Mr. Yow, ordering Lowe's to provide a new panel of neurologists or authorize treatment by a referred neurologist in Pensacola. Additionally, the Court awarded Mr. Yow attorney's fees for the wrongful denial of benefits and referred Lowe's to the Bureau’s Compliance Program for consideration of a penalty for failing to provide the requested panel.

Medical Treatment RelocationPhysician Panel RequestAttorney's Fees AwardEmployer PenaltiesExpedited Hearing DecisionNeurological Injury ClaimsMigraine TreatmentWrongful Denial of BenefitsTennessee Workers' CompensationChange of Residence Medical Benefits
References
4
Case No. 2021-05-0645
Regular Panel Decision
Aug 05, 2022

Freeman, Joshua v. Certified Maintenance, Service, Inc.

Joshua Freeman, an employee of Certified Maintenance, Service, Inc., sustained a compensable back injury on March 16, 2019. The employer provided medical benefits, which included treatment and evaluations from several physicians, including an orthopedic specialist, a physiatrist, and a neurologist. Mr. Freeman sought an expedited hearing to compel the employer to provide a scapular MRI recommended by the neurologist, Dr. Larry Gibson. However, Dr. Gibson later testified that he could not confirm the medical necessity of the MRI for the work injury. The Court, presided by Judge Dale Tipps, denied the request, concluding that Mr. Freeman failed to provide sufficient medical evidence that the MRI was reasonable and necessary for his compensable injury, thereby not meeting the likelihood of prevailing on the merits.

Workers' CompensationMedical TreatmentMRI DenialCompensable InjuryExpedited HearingMedical NecessityThoracic StrainDegenerative Disc DiseaseNeurological ComplaintsPhysician Recommendation
References
1
Case No. 2022-08-0265
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 18, 2023

Taylor, Debbie v, The Kroger Co.

Ms. Taylor requested that The Kroger Co. pay for treatment from a headache specialist and associated penalties, arguing that she was still owed further medical treatment. Kroger contended it had fulfilled all its medical treatment obligations under law. The case involved various medical evaluations, including neurologists Dr. Alan Nadel and Dr. Mohammed Assaf, neuropsychologist Dr. Christopher Bassin, and psychiatrist Dr. Melvin Golden. The Court ultimately denied Ms. Taylor's request for an additional specialist. The Court found that Kroger had provided all injury-related treatment as required, that Dr. Assaf had not refused further treatment, and that the law did not mandate a third neurologist's opinion in this circumstance. Therefore, Ms. Taylor did not demonstrate a likelihood of prevailing on her request at a hearing on the merits.

Post-traumatic headachesMedical benefits denialNeurology evaluationNeuropsychological evaluationPsychiatric evaluationWorkers' compensation appealExpedited hearingTreating physicianSecond opinion eligibilityMaximum Medical Improvement
References
3
Case No. 2015-06-0125
Regular Panel Decision
Jun 01, 2015

Glynise Johnson v. OBERTO Sausage Co.

Glynise Johnson, an employee of Oberto Sausage Co., filed a Request for Expedited Hearing seeking an order for her employer to provide a panel of neurologists for her work-related back and hand injury sustained on January 5, 2015, after slipping on icy stairs. Oberto had already provided a panel of orthopedic physicians, from which Ms. Johnson selected Dr. Clendenin, who recommended facet injections which she declined, asking for pain management instead. Dr. Jeffrey Hazlewood then examined her but found no evidence supporting a neurological referral. The Court denied Ms. Johnson's request, finding she failed to prove that a neurologist referral was reasonable and necessary, as none of her authorized treating physicians had recommended it. The case is set for an Initial Hearing on July 7, 2015.

Expedited HearingMedical Treatment DisputeNeurologist ReferralBurden of ProofWork InjuryBack InjuryPanel of PhysiciansPain ManagementFacet JointTennessee Workers' Compensation Law
References
2
Case No. 2020-01-0376
Regular Panel Decision
Mar 02, 2023

Melton, Jeannette v. Amazon.com Services, LLC

Ms. Melton, an employee, sought an order for a panel of physicians in New Orleans, Louisiana, after relocating, following a work-related head injury on June 3, 2020. The employer, Amazon.com Services, LLC, denied the panel, citing a records review and issues with providing a neurologist in the requested locale. Judge Audrey Headrick found the treating physician's opinion more persuasive than the defense's record review, ruling that Ms. Melton is entitled to additional medical benefits and a panel of neurologists in her new community. The Court ordered Amazon to provide the panel by March 31, 2023. Additionally, the case was referred to the Compliance Program for consideration of penalty assessments against Amazon for its failure to provide a compliant panel and continue medical benefits.

Workers' CompensationConcussionTraumatic Brain InjuryPanel of PhysiciansMedical TreatmentOut-of-State RelocationNeurologist ReferralEmployer ObligationUtilization ReviewPenalty Assessment
References
1
Case No. 2018-03-0282
Regular Panel Decision
Jul 26, 2018

Teague, James v. Proimage Wholesale Signs, LLC

James Teague, an employee, sought an expedited hearing for medical benefits related to bilateral hand numbness and weakness, which he attributed to chemical exposure at work. Earlier, he was diagnosed with allergic contact dermatitis by treating dermatologists, Drs. Quyn Rahman and Kemunto Mokaya. An independent medical evaluation by Dr. C.M. Salekin suggested chemical-induced peripheral neuropathy, but the authorized treating physician, Dr. Mokaya, later expressed uncertainty regarding the causal link between his work exposure and neurological issues, recommending a neurologist's evaluation. The Court concluded that Mr. Teague failed to establish a likelihood of prevailing on the merits for causation of his neurological symptoms. Nevertheless, it ordered the employer, Prolmage Wholesale Signs, LLC, and its carrier, EMC Insurance Company, to provide medical treatment, specifically an appointment with a panel-selected neurologist, based on Dr. Mokaya's recommendation.

Workers' CompensationMedical BenefitsExpedited HearingNeuropathyContact DermatitisChemical ExposureCausation DisputeTreating Physician OpinionIMEPanel of Physicians
References
2
Case No. 2017-08-1205
Regular Panel Decision
Apr 27, 2018

Washington, John v. UPS Ground Freight, Inc.

John Washington, an employee of UPS Ground Freight, Inc., requested additional medical and temporary disability benefits for a September 7, 2017 work injury. UPS maintained it had paid all entitled benefits and had provided multiple panels of neurologists, which Mr. Washington largely rejected due to subjective concerns. The Court found that UPS had complied with its statutory duty to provide physicians, but Mr. Washington had not complied with his duty to choose one. The Court ordered UPS to allow Mr. Washington to choose another neurologist from the previously provided panels, warning that benefits could remain suspended if he failed to comply. The Court denied Mr. Washington's requests for payment of unauthorized emergency room bills, personal care assistant payments, additional temporary disability benefits, and adjustments to his wage rate calculation, concluding that his refusal to accept medical services justified the suspension of temporary benefits.

Workers' CompensationMedical BenefitsTemporary DisabilityExpedited HearingNeurology EvaluationPost-Concussion SyndromeWage Rate CalculationUnauthorized TreatmentPhysician PanelEmployee Non-Compliance
References
6
Showing 1-10 of 76 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational