TENNESSEE BUREAU OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS

IN THE COURT OF WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS 

AT NASHVILLE

DONNA WILHITE, ) Docket No. 2016-06-0414

Employee, )

v. ) State File No. 19556-2016

)

LOWES MILLWORKS, ) Judge Joshua Davis Baker

Employer. )

EXPEDITED HEARING ORDER 

FOR ADDITIONAL MEDICAL BENEFITS

(FILE REVIEW ONLY)

This claim came before the Court on a request for expedited hearing filed by 

Lowes Millworks. This is the second request for expedited hearing in this case. The 

central issue is Lowes’ obligation to provide Ms. Wilhite continuing medical treatment. 

Lowes contends the Court should rescind its obligation arguing that the treating 

physician’s causation opinion makes it unlikely Ms. Wilhite would prevail at a hearing on 

the merits concerning the compensability of her injury. For the reasons provided below, 

the Court holds Ms. Wilhite would likely prevail at a hearing on the merits and orders 

Lowes to provide Ms. Wilhite the trigger-finger release surgery recommended by the 

authorized treating physician. 

History of Claim

Lowes asked that the Court convene an evidentiary hearing to consider the issue 

set forth in its request for expedited hearing. After discussion at a status conference, 

however, the parties and the Court agreed that the Court should enter an interlocutory 

order based on its review of the file without an evidentiary hearing. As the Court issued 

this decision without an evidentiary hearing, it derived the claim history solely from the 

file documents. 

On December 22, 2016, the Court issued an order following an expedited hearing 

that required Lowes to provide Ms. Wilhite medical treatment for her trigger-finger 

condition with Dr. Joseph Pickering, whom the Court designated as the authorized 

treating physician. Lowes complied with the order by scheduling Ms. Wilhite an 

appointment with Dr. Pickering.
2

After the appointment, the claims adjuster for Lowes sent Dr. Pickering a letter 

seeking his opinion on the causal connection between the trigger-finger condition and 

Ms. Wilhite’s work for Lowes. In that letter, the claims adjuster indicated that Ms. 

Wilhite suffered the injury on September 19, 2015, but did not report it until February of 

the following year. The letter also indicated that Dr. Pickering first saw Ms. Wilhite in 

January 2016. (Appx. at 12.) 

Upon receipt of the letter, Dr. Pickering wrote a reply detailing his interactions 

with Ms. Wilhite concerning the triggering condition. He also wrote, “It is my 

professional opinion that painting a door in September without an injury would not be 

expected to cause trigger finger six months later in February.” He wrote the reply on 

January 13, 2017. (Appx. at 10.)

Lowes then filed this request asking the Court to issue an order cutting off Ms. 

Wilhite’s access to further treatment with Dr. Pickering. It argued that, in light of Dr. 

Pickering’s opinion, Ms. Wilhite cannot carry her burden of proving medical causation,

which prevents her from demonstrating a likelihood of success at a trial on the merits of 

her claim. 

In response to the request, Ms. Wilhite filed updated medical records showing she 

was first diagnosed with trigger finger when she visited Dr. Jane Siegel on September 28, 

2015. Additionally, the updated medical records from Dr. Pickering state the following 

in a note he dictated on January 24, 2017: “Based on her history given today, I believe 

that her right ring finger trigger was caused by an injury on her job. We are going to try 

to get her approved for a trigger finger release.” (Appx. at 11.) 

Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

The sole issue in this expedited hearing is Ms. Wilhite’s entitlement to additional 

medical treatment from Dr. Pickering for her triggering condition, specifically including 

the recommended trigger-finger release surgery.

1

 Except in “the most obvious, simple 

and routine cases,” an employee must establish by expert medical testimony that he or 

she sustained injury and a causal relationship exists between the injury and the 

employment activity. Wheetley v. State, 2014 Tenn. LEXIS 476, at *5 (June 25, 2014). 

Here, in response to a letter from the claims adjuster, Dr. Pickering stated Ms. 

Wilhite’s triggering condition that developed in February likely did not result from her 

work at Lowes in September. As the authorized treating physician, Dr. Pickering’s 

 

1 Ms. Wilhite also seeks damages for pain and suffering. As compensation for pain and suffering is not available 

under the Workers’ Compensation Law, the Court denies her request. 
3

opinion on the causal relationship between Ms. Wilhite’s triggering condition and her 

work is presumed correct. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-102(14)(E) (2016) (“The opinion 

of the treating physician, selected by the employee from the employer’s designated panel 

of physicians pursuant to § 50-6-204(a)(3), shall be presumed correct on the issue of 

causation but this presumption shall be rebuttable by a preponderance of the evidence.”). 

Accordingly, in order to continue treating with Dr. Pickering under workers’ 

compensation, Ms. Wilhite must present countervailing evidence sufficient to overcome 

his causation opinion. The Court finds that Ms. Wilhite carried that burden for two 

reasons. 

First, the letter from the claims adjuster to Dr. Pickering contained several 

statements that are incorrect and, in the opinion of the Court, skewed his opinion. The 

letter indicated Ms. Wilhite did not report her injury until February 2016. However, this 

Court found following the first expedited hearing that Ms. Wilhite reported her injury on 

the day it occurred. Additionally, the letter implied that Ms. Wilhite’s condition did not 

develop until several months after her incident on September 19, 2015. The medical 

records from Dr. Siegel, however, show that she suffered from the condition on 

September 28, only nine days after the incident at work. Accordingly, the letter seeking 

Dr. Pickering’s opinion did not properly summarize the facts of the case. 

Second, Dr. Pickering gave his opinion on January 13, 2017. However, after 

giving that opinion, and before Lowes filed its request for expedited hearing seeking to 

deny further benefits, Dr. Pickering changed his opinion. On January 24, he stated that 

Ms. Wilhite’s condition is related to her work and believed trigger-finger surgery is 

warranted as treatment. Additionally, the Court notes that Dr. Pickering provided this 

opinion almost a month before Lowe’s filed its position statement urging that the Court 

deny Ms. Wilhite further medical treatment due to the lack of an opinion causally linking 

her trigger-finger condition to her work for Lowes. (See Appx. at 11, 14.) 

For the reasons set forth above, the Court holds Ms. Wilhite is likely to prevail at a 

hearing on the merits and orders Lowes to provide her continuing medical benefits to 

include the trigger-finger release surgery recommended by Dr. Pickering. 

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED as follows:

1. Lowes shall provide Ms. Wilhite’s ongoing medical care with the authorized 

treating physician, Dr. Pickering, to include approval and payment for the right 

trigger-finger release surgery. Lowes shall schedule and approve the surgery 

within seven business days of the date of this order. 
4

2. This matter is set for a status conference on May 1, 2017, at 10:30 a.m. (CDT). 

The Court will convene the hearing via telephone. The parties must call 615-741-

2113 or (toll-free) 855-874-0474 to participate in the hearing.

3. Unless interlocutory appeal of the Expedited Hearing Order is filed, compliance 

with this Order must occur no later than seven business days from the date of entry 

of this Order as required by Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-239(d)(3) 

(2016). The Insurer or Self-Insured Employer must submit confirmation of 

compliance with this Order to the Bureau by email to 

WCCompliance.Program@tn.gov no later than the seventh business day after 

entry of this Order. Failure to submit the necessary confirmation within the period 

of compliance may result in a penalty assessment for non-compliance.

4. For questions regarding compliance, please contact the Workers’ Compensation 

Compliance Unit via email WCCompliance.Program@tn.gov or by calling (615)

253-1471.

ENTERED ON THIS THE 1

ST DAY OF MARCH, 2017.

_____________________________________

Judge Joshua Davis Baker

Court of Workers’ Compensation Claims
5

APPENDIX

1. Affidavits of Donna Wilhite and Jordan Puryear

2. Form C-41 Wage Statement 

3. Medical bills and statements of Donna Wilhite 

4. Operative Report of Donna Wilhite 

5. “Affidavit Info Clarification” 

6. Facebook posts of ring finger 

7. Letter from Lowes’ regarding surgery filed October 20, 2016

8. Letter from Lowes’ regarding termination 

9. Letter from Cigna regarding short term disability 

10.Written opinion of Dr. Robert Pickering 

11.Medical records

12.Letter from insurance adjuster to Dr. Pickering

13.Donna Wilhite’s position statement

14.Lowes’ position statement

15.Docketing notice for file review
6

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was sent to the 

following recipients by the following methods of service on this the ____day of March, 

2017.

Name Certified 

Mail

Via 

Fax

Via 

Email

Service sent to: 

Donna Wilhite x dkw3dogd@yahoo.com

Jordan Puryear x jordan.puryear@leitnerfirm.com

Kenny Veit x kenny.veit@leitnerfirm.com

_____________________________________

Penny Shrum, Clerk

Court of Workers' Compensation Claims

WC.CourtClerk@tn.gov

1st