Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (2026)
Request of hearing after issuance of dispute certification notice - Issuance of notice - Permission required to present issues not certified by mediator - Conduct of hearings - Hearings of disputes on expedited basis - Discovery disputes -Penalties for failure to comply with orders - Filing fees - Judicial review of orders
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) Within sixty (60) days after issuance of a dispute certification notice by a workers' compensation mediator, a party seeking further resolution of disputed issues shall file a request for a hearing with the bureau, and the clerk of the court of workers' compensation claims shall issue notice to all parties identifying the judge to whom the claim has been assigned and the procedure for scheduling and preparing for a hearing.
- (b)
- (1) Unless permission has been granted by the assigned workers' compensation judge, only issues that have been certified by a workers' compensation mediator within a dispute certification notice may be presented to the workers' compensation judge for adjudication.
- (2) Following the issuance of a dispute certification notice and assignment of the claim to a workers' compensation judge, the workers' compensation judge may grant permission for parties to present issues that have not been certified by a workers' compensation mediator only upon finding that:
- (A) The parties did not have knowledge of the issue prior to issuance of the dispute certification and could not have known of the issue despite reasonable investigation; and
- (B) Prohibiting presentation of the issue would result in substantial injustice to the petitioning party.
- (c) Hearings of disputes shall be conducted in the following manner:
- (1) All hearings shall be conducted within the timeframes adopted by the administrator through the promulgation of rules. The Tennessee Rules of Evidence and the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure shall govern proceedings at all hearings before a workers' compensation judge unless an alternate procedural or evidentiary rule has been adopted by the administrator. Whenever the administrator has adopted an alternate procedural or evidentiary rule that conflicts with the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure or the Tennessee Rules of Evidence, the rule adopted by the administrator shall apply;
- (2) Following the hearing, the workers' compensation judge shall issue a compensation order that sets forth findings of fact and conclusions of law, and, if appropriate, an order for the payment of benefits under the workers' compensation law. The workers' compensation judge shall note the date of entry on the order and a copy of the order shall be distributed to the parties in accordance with procedures adopted by the administrator;
- (3) If a party who has filed a request for hearing files a notice of nonsuit of the action, either party shall have ninety (90) days from the date of the order of dismissal to institute an action for recovery of benefits under this chapter;
- (4) All hearings before the workers' compensation judge shall be open to the public. The parties may provide a court reporter for the preparation of a record;
- (5) The testimony of any witness may be taken by deposition according to the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure or may be taken before the workers' compensation judge. No costs shall be charged, taxed or collected by the workers' compensation judge for the appearance of witnesses except fees for witnesses who testify under subpoena. The witnesses shall be allowed the same fee for attendance and mileage as is fixed by law in civil actions;
- (6) Unless the statute provides for a different standard of proof, at a hearing the employee shall bear the burden of proving each and every element of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence;
- (7) There shall be a presumption that the findings and conclusions of the workers' compensation judge are correct, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. The decision of the workers' compensation judge shall become final thirty (30) days after the workers' compensation judge enters a compensation order, unless a party in interest seeks an appeal of the decision from the workers' compensation appeals board pursuant to this chapter;
- (8) The workers' compensation judge may, in his discretion, assess discretionary costs including reasonable fees for depositions of medical experts against the employer upon adjudication of the employee's claim as compensable;
- (9) After an order entered by a workers' compensation judge has become final, the parties subject to the order shall have five (5) business days after all appeals are exhausted to comply with the order or the noncompliant parties shall be subject to penalization as provided by § 50-6-118;
- (10) In any claim where the employee has suffered a catastrophic injury, the workers' compensation judge assigned to the claim shall have discretion to order that the claim be heard on an expedited basis. If the assigned workers' compensation judge orders an expedited hearing of the claim, the claim shall be given priority over all cases on the workers' compensation judge's trial docket with the exception of any other claims that the workers' compensation judge has previously ordered to be heard on an expedited basis under this subdivision (c)(10).
- (d) Hearings of disputes on an expedited basis shall be conducted in the following manner:
- (1) Upon motion of either party made at any time after a dispute certification notice has been issued by a workers' compensation mediator, a workers' compensation judge may, at the judge's discretion, hear disputes over issues provided in the dispute certification notice concerning the provision of temporary disability or medical benefits on an expedited basis and enter an interlocutory order upon determining that the injured employee would likely prevail at a hearing on the merits. A copy of the motion shall be served by the moving party on all other parties to the claim in accordance with procedures adopted by the administrator;
- (2) A workers' compensation judge is not required to hold a full evidentiary hearing before issuing an interlocutory order for temporary disability or medical benefits;
- (3) If temporary disability or medical benefits are ordered, the employer shall have seven (7) business days to comply with the order or to request an appeal from the workers' compensation appeals board. Unless modified by the workers' compensation appeals board following an appeal or unless a subsequent order to modify an interlocutory order for temporary disability or medical benefits is issued by the workers' compensation judge presiding over the claim, the interlocutory order shall remain in effect pending conclusion of the matter by hearing according to the procedure provided in subsection (c);
- (4) If a motion for temporary disability or medical benefits is denied on the basis that the claim is not compensable, the proceeding shall continue according to the procedure provided in subsection (c) unless the employee files a request for an appeal to the workers' compensation appeals board. At any time after the employee has exhausted the procedures for seeking an appeal from the workers' compensation appeals board, as provided in this chapter, the workers' compensation judge may entertain an appropriate motion from the employer for dismissal of the claim.
- (e) All discovery disputes, including motions to compel and for protective order, shall be adjudicated upon the review of written motions and affidavits. A workers' compensation judge may, in the judge's discretion, convene a hearing on a discovery dispute only upon a finding that good cause to convene a hearing exists.
- (f) The failure of any party to comply in a timely manner with an interlocutory or final order issued by a workers' compensation judge may result in the assessment of a penalty as provided in § 50-6-118.
- (g) The administrator shall have authority to assess filing fees sufficient to offset the cost of administering this chapter.
- (h) Except as otherwise provided in § 50-6-118, no order issued by a workers' compensation judge shall be subject to judicial review pursuant to the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act, compiled in title 4, chapter 5.
Acts 1992, ch. 900, § 14; 1996, ch. 944, § 22; 1999 , ch. 520, § 41; 2004 , ch. 962, § 20; 2008 , ch. 1183, §§ 4, 7; 2013 , ch. 289, § 82; 2015 , ch. 341, §§ 12, 15; 2022 , ch. 715, § 5.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1,942
cases (666 in the last 5 years), 1998–2026 · leading case: Lacey Chapman v. Davita, Inc., 380 S.W.3d 710 (Tenn. 2012).
Lacey Chapman v. Davita, Inc., 380 S.W.3d 710 (Tenn. 2012). “gned document executed by the proper parties and the Workers’ Compensation Specialist; (c) Issuance of an impasse report signed and dated by a Workers’ Compensation Specialist^] (d) Conducting and completing mediation by private Rule 31 mediator, provided the Department has…”
Syph, Deborah v. Choice Food Grp., Inc., 2016 TN WC App. 18 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (d)(4) (2015).”
Deborah Williams v. Tecumseh Prods. Co., 978 S.W.2d 932 (Tenn. 1998). “The specific local procedures reviewed by the panel in this case were as follows: 1) Whether the requirement of scheduling a benefit review conference within thirty days of a request for such conference conflicts with Tenn.Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(l) (Supp.1997); 2) whether…”
Thompson, David v. Comcast Corp., 2018 TN WC App. 1 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2018). “” 4 See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2017) (“There shall be a presumption that the findings and conclusions of the workers’ compensation judge are correct, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise.”
Valladares, Lazaro v. Transco Prods., Inc., et al. & Williams Specialty Servs., LLC., et al., 2016 TN WC App. 34 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2015).”
Miller, Carolyn v. Old Folks Mission Ctr., Inc., 2019 TN WC App. 2 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2019). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2018).”
Iboy, Olga Esperanza v. Kenten Mgmt.< LLC, 2018 TN WC App. 21 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2018). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2017).”
Rucker, Tony v. Flexible Staffing Solutions of TN, 2016 TN WC App. 22 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (d)(l). It is within the trial judge's discretion whether to hold "a full evidentiary hearing before issuing an interlocutory order for temporary disability or medical benefits.”
Panzarella, Samuel v. Amazon.com, Inc, 2017 TN WC App. 5 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2017). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2015).”
Burnett, Jay v. Builders Transp., 2018 TN WC App. 5 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2018). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2017).”
Johnson, Patricia v. Dollar Gen. Corp., Docket No. 2023-06-6072, 2026 TN WC App. 6 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2026). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2025).”
Riley, Patrick v. Grp. Elec., 2016 TN WC App. 28 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2015).”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(10) — 1 case
Cartee, Diana v. Schwanâs Food Serv., Inc., 2015 TN WC 175 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2015).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(a) — 6 cases
Smith, William Edward, Jr. v. The Newman Grp., LLC, 2015 TN WC App. 31 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2015).
Valladares, Lazaro v. Transco Prods., Inc., et al. & Williams Specialty Servs., LLC., et al., 2016 TN WC App. 34 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2015).”
Syph, Deborah v. Choice Food Grp., Inc., 2016 TN WC App. 18 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (d)(4) (2015).”
Gunnels, Jewell v. Walgreens Co., 2016 TN WC 264 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Lawson, Linda V. HDK Indus., Inc., 2017 TN WC App. 23 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2017).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(a)(1) — 1 case
Swafford, Michael v. Morristown Drives Serv., Inc., 2017 TN WC 31 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2017).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(b) — 12 cases
Valladares, Lazaro v. Transco Prods., Inc., et al. & Williams Specialty Servs., LLC., et al., 2016 TN WC App. 34 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2015).”
Harris, Terrel v. Bennett Tool & Die, LLC, 2016 TN WC 68 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Swain, Kenneth v. Stand. Candy Co., 2016 TN WC 76 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Lee, Annabelle v. Macy's, 2017 TN WC 199 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2017).
Iboy, Olga Esperanza v. Kenten Mgmt.< LLC, 2018 TN WC App. 21 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2018). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2017).”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(b)(1) — 11 cases
Roark, Kristen v. Team Health, 2016 TN WC 96 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Lamm, Terry v. E. Miller Constr., Inc., 2016 TN WC 203 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Lamm, Terry v. E. Miller Constr., Inc., 2016 TN WC App. 60 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016).
Brown, Rickie A. v. Goodman Global, 2017 TN WC 77 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2017).
Collins, Terry v. Champion Home Builders, 2017 TN WC 167 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2017).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(b)(2) — 4 cases
Lamm, Terry v. E. Miller Constr., Inc., 2016 TN WC App. 60 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016).
Iboy, Olga Esperanza v. Kenten Mgmt.< LLC, 2018 TN WC App. 21 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2018). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2017).”
James, Bobby v. Landair Transp., Inc., 2015 TN WC App. 26 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2015).
Marzette, Shelton v. Pat Salmon & Sons, Inc., 2015 TN WC App. 30 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2015).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(b)(2)(A) — 2 cases
Gilbert, Thomas v. United Parsel Serv., Inc., 2016 TN WC 163 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Pridgen, Raymond v. Texas Roadhouse Holdings, LLC, 2024 TN WC App. 13 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2024).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(b)(l) — 4 cases
Marzette, Shelton v. Pat Salmon & Sons, Inc., 2015 TN WC App. 30 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2015).
Gilbert, Thomas v. United Parsel Serv., Inc., 2016 TN WC 163 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Pierce, Artie v. Metro Indus., 2015 TN WC 61 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2015).
Anderson, Mernetha v. Ozburn-Hessey Logistics, LLC, 2015 TN WC 64 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2015).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c) — 21 cases
Lacey Chapman v. Davita, Inc., 380 S.W.3d 710 (Tenn. 2012). “gned document executed by the proper parties and the Workers’ Compensation Specialist; (c) Issuance of an impasse report signed and dated by a Workers’ Compensation Specialist^] (d) Conducting and completing mediation by private Rule 31 mediator, provided the Department has…”
Syph, Deborah v. Choice Food Grp., Inc., 2016 TN WC App. 18 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (d)(4) (2015).”
Hardin, Gregory v. W.A. Kendall & Co., Inc., 2019 TN WC App. 23 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2019).
Gillum, Mary v. Dollar Gen. Corp., 2020 TN WC App. 25 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2020).
Burton, Lovell v. Express Emp. Servs., 2015 TN WC 33 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2015).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(1) — 17 cases
Syph, Deborah v. Choice Food Grp., Inc., 2016 TN WC App. 18 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (d)(4) (2015).”
Johnson, Patricia v. Dollar Gen. Corp., Docket No. 2023-06-6072, 2026 TN WC App. 6 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2026). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2025).”
Valladares, Lazaro v. Transco Prods., Inc., et al. & Williams Specialty Servs., LLC., et al., 2016 TN WC App. 34 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2015).”
Hobaugh-Mendez, Alice v. Sunoco/Tigermarket/Southside Oil, 2015 TN WC 79 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2015).
Vaughn, Billy v. Kenneth Parsons d/b/a Performance Mech., 2015 TN WC 68 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2015).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(10) — 1 case
MacDonald, Michael v. Greene Cnty. Sheriff\s Dep't", 2015 TN WC App. 27 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2015).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(2) — 3 cases
Hardin, Gregory v. W.A. Kendall & Co., Inc., 2019 TN WC App. 23 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2019).
Rucker, Tony v. Flexible Staffing Solutions of TN, 2016 TN WC App. 22 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (d)(l). It is within the trial judge's discretion whether to hold "a full evidentiary hearing before issuing an interlocutory order for temporary disability or medical benefits.”
Kean, Carma v. Navion BKE Bellevue, LLC, 2024 TN WC App. 34 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2024).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(3) — 4 cases
Day, Misti v. Great Salons of Knoxville, Inc., 2021 TN WC App. 49 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2021).
Stansbury, Pamela v. Fed. Express Corp., Docket No. 2025-80-2001, 2025 TN WC App. 43 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2025).
Hodge, Michael Brendan v. Alcoa, Inc. & Arconic Corp. (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2026).
Myers, Walter Hubert v. Alcoa, Inc. & Arconic Corp (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2026).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(6) — 107 cases
Panzarella, Samuel v. Amazon.com, Inc, 2017 TN WC App. 5 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2017). “” Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2015).”
Poindexter, Robert v. Estes Express Lines, 2014 TN WC 3 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2014).
Cooper, Jimmy v. Fed. Express Corp., 2014 TN WC 14 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2014).
Hobaugh-Mendez, Alice v. Sunoco/Tigermarket/Southside Oil, 2015 TN WC 79 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2015).
Marshall, Tara v. Mueller Co., 2016 TN WC 54 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(7) — 111 cases
Hall, Steven v. Mid-South Indus., Inc., 2016 TN WC 142 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Moore, Dianne v. Beacon Transp., LLC, 2021 TN WC App. 81 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2021).
Rucker, Tony v. Flexible Staffing Solutions of TN, 2016 TN WC App. 22 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (d)(l). It is within the trial judge's discretion whether to hold "a full evidentiary hearing before issuing an interlocutory order for temporary disability or medical benefits.”
Helgerson, Mitchel v. Packer Sanitation Servs., Inc., 2015 TN WC App. 33 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2015).
Shepherd, Stephen W. v. Haren Constr. Co.., Inc., et. al., 2016 TN WC App. 14 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(8) — 14 cases
Garassino, Louis v. W. Express, Inc., 2016 TN WC App. 59 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016).
Ray, Jr., Kenneth v. Rollins, Inc., 2021 TN WC 206 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2021).
Garassino, Louis v. W. Express, 2016 TN WC 100 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Hall, Steven v. Mid-South Indus., Inc., 2016 TN WC 142 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Leatherwood, David v. Mayfield Dairy Farms, LLC, 2019 TN WC 29 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2019).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(9) — 9 cases
Scales, Elijah v. Michael Sherlock, 2016 TN WC 141 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Hall, Steven v. Mid-South Indus., Inc., 2016 TN WC 142 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Womack, Angela v. Yorozu Auto. TN, 2016 TN WC 153 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Wiliams, David v. Nissan North Am., Inc., 2016 TN WC 162 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Rohrenbach, Terry v. Yates Servs., 2016 TN WC 258 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(l) — 4 cases
Deborah Williams v. Tecumseh Prods. Co., 978 S.W.2d 932 (Tenn. 1998). “The specific local procedures reviewed by the panel in this case were as follows: 1) Whether the requirement of scheduling a benefit review conference within thirty days of a request for such conference conflicts with Tenn.Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(l) (Supp.1997); 2) whether…”
Syph, Deborah v. Choice Food Grp., Inc., 2016 TN WC App. 18 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (d)(4) (2015).”
Brown, Bonnie v. Whole Foods Markets, Inc., 2016 TN WC 107 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Quinn, Karen v. Seaton Corp. d/b/a SMX Staff Mgmt., 2015 TN WC 131 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2015).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(c)(l0) — 1 case
MacDonald, Michael v. Greene Cnty. Sheriff\s Dep't", 2015 TN WC App. 27 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2015).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d) — 35 cases
Thompson, David v. Comcast Corp., 2018 TN WC App. 1 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2018). “” 4 See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2017) (“There shall be a presumption that the findings and conclusions of the workers’ compensation judge are correct, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise.”
Syph, Deborah v. Choice Food Grp., Inc., 2016 TN WC App. 18 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (d)(4) (2015).”
Valladares, Lazaro v. Transco Prods., Inc., et al. & Williams Specialty Servs., LLC., et al., 2016 TN WC App. 34 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2015).”
Andrews, Torey v. Yates Servs., LLC, 2018 TN WC App. 20 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2018).
McGauvran, James v. ATOS Syntel, Inc., 2021 TN WC App. 66 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2021).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(1) — 93 cases
Miller, Carolyn v. Old Folks Mission Ctr., Inc., 2019 TN WC App. 2 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2019). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2018).”
Revnew, Deborah v. Amazon.com, Inc., 2016 TN WC App. 51 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016).
Thompson, David v. Comcast Corp., 2018 TN WC App. 1 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2018). “” 4 See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2017) (“There shall be a presumption that the findings and conclusions of the workers’ compensation judge are correct, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise.”
Qualls, Steven v. Fed. Mogul, 2023 TN WC App. 8 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2023).
Burnett, Jay v. Builders Transp., 2018 TN WC App. 5 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2018). “See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2017).”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(1)(2015) — 3 cases
Love, Sarah v. Delta Faucet, 2016 TN WC 178 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Beecher, Caroyln v. McKesson Corp., 2016 TN WC 267 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Dyer, Teresa v. Support Solutions of the Mid-South, 2016 TN WC 268 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(2) — 14 cases
Poellnitz, Robert v. Resolute Forest Prods., 2016 TN WC 159 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Mendez, Severiano v. Serra Jackson Auto.,, 2016 TN WC 218 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Venable, Tim v. Superior Essex, Inc, 2016 TN WC 202 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Venable, Tim v. Superior Essex, Inc, 2016 TN WC 204 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Wilson, Richard Lee v. Ryder Logistics, 2016 TN WC 198 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(3) — 556 cases
Davis, Betty J. v. Life Line Screening of Am., Ltd., 2017 TN WC 81 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2017).
Pauley, Jeffery v. TN Timber & Mgmt. Co., 2016 TN WC 3 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Smith, Timeka v. Chattanooga Area Reg'l Transit Auth., 2016 TN WC 4 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Rucker, Tony v. Flexible Staffing Solutions of Tennessee, 2016 TN WC 12 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Scales, Elijah v. Michael Sherlock, 2016 TN WC 18 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(4) — 6 cases
Syph, Deborah v. Choice Food Grp., Inc., 2016 TN WC App. 18 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (d)(4) (2015).”
Jones, Anthony v. Trojan Labor of Nashville, LLC, 2016 TN WC 82 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Palmer, Norman v. Hardy, 2017 TN WC App. 18 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2017).
Willis, Joseph v. All Staff, 2015 TN WC App. 40 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2015).
Munyan, Bart C. v. PCL Indus. Constr. Co., 2016 TN WC 291 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(l) — 56 cases
Lewis, Lea Ann v. Molly Maid, et al., 2016 TN WC App. 17 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016).
Riley, Patrick v. Grp. Elec., 2016 TN WC App. 28 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239 (c)(7) (2015).”
Frye, Annette v. Vincent Printing Co., 2016 TN WC App. 35 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2016).
McCord, Patricia v. Advantage Human Resourcing, 2015 TN WC App. 5 (Tenn. Work. Comp. App. Bd. 2015).
Duncan, Danya v. Houchens Food Grp., Inc., 2015 TN WC 47 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2015).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(d)(l)(2015) — 1 case
Buckner, Douglas A. v. Eaton Corp., 2016 TN WC 214 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-239(e) — 1 case
Brown, Bonnie v. Whole Foods Markets, Inc., 2016 TN WC 107 (Tenn. Ct. Work. Comp. Cl. 2016).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.