Belinda LeMarie v. Lowe's Home Centers, LLC

Tenn.October 15, 2025No. M2025-00128-SC-R3-WC

Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s): Senior Judge Roy B. Morgan
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling: Unknown
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached: appeal to Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel affirming Appeals Board decision

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The court affirmed the Appeals Board's decision requiring Lowe's to provide employee with a new panel of physicians to treat her work-related foot injury after her treating physician discharged her.

Excerpt

Belinda LeMaire ("Employee") sustained an injury to her right foot while working forLowe's Home Centers, LLC ("Employer"). The claim was accepted as compensable, andthe Court of Workers' Compensation Claims ("trial court") entered a compensation orderawarding permanent-partial disability benefits along with future reasonable and necessaryrnedical benefits. Employee subsequently filed a petition for benefit determination statingthat she had been discharged by her treating physician, and Employer was refusing toprovide additional medical treatment. Following a hearing, the trial court ordered Employerto provide Employee with a new panel of physicians qualified and willing to treat her workrelatedinjury. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board ("Appeals l3oard") affirmed.Employer has appealed and the appeal has been referred to the Special Workers'Compensation Appeals Panel pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 51. We affirmthe judgment of the Appeals Board and adopt its opinion as set forth in the attachedAppendix.

What This Ruling Means

**Worker Wins Right to New Doctors After Workplace Injury** Belinda LeMaire injured her right foot while working at Lowe's Home Centers. Lowe's accepted that the injury was work-related and agreed to pay for her medical treatment and disability benefits. However, problems arose when her treating doctor discharged her from care, leaving her without ongoing medical treatment for her work injury. LeMaire asked the court to require Lowe's to provide her with a new panel of doctors to choose from so she could continue receiving treatment for her foot injury. Lowe's apparently resisted this request. The court sided with LeMaire, ordering Lowe's to provide her with a new panel of physicians to treat her work-related foot injury. This decision was upheld on appeal. **What this means for workers:** If you're injured at work and your doctor stops treating you, your employer's workers' compensation insurance must provide you with access to other doctors. You have the right to continue receiving reasonable and necessary medical care for your work injury, even if your original doctor is no longer available. Don't let your employer cut off your medical treatment simply because one doctor discharged you from care.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse more:Workers’ Compensation cases

Similar Rulings

Bowers, Steven v. County Of Taylor

W.D. Wis.Apr 2022

Defendant Win

Derinda Carr v. Windham Professionals, Inc.

Tenn.Apr 2022

Appellant Derinda Carr challenges the trial court's finding her neck injury did not arise primarily "out of and in the course and scope of' her employment. The appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel for a hearing and a report of findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 51. We agree with the trial court and affirm the judgment.

Defendant Win

Read Full Opinion More Lowe's Home Centers, LLC Rulings All Rulings

Browse Related

More retail employer cases

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

Check My Rights Learn the Basics

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.