A doctor's recommendation wasn't enough to force the staffing giant's hand
Staffing giant ADECCO has no legal duty to assign a nurse case manager in a non-catastrophic workers' compensation claim, a Tennessee appeals panel ruled.
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board handed down its decision on March 24, 2026, affirming a lower court order that denied an injured temporary worker's request for mandatory nurse case management, attorneys' fees, costs and penalties. The case settles a question that has real implications for HR professionals overseeing workers' compensation programs.
Ronnie Slater, a 58-year-old Chattanooga resident, was placed by ADECCO at a company in Georgia. In January 2020, he was helping move large rolls of material when he felt a pop in his back and pain shooting down his left leg. He reported the injury and was eventually diagnosed with a disc herniation with radiculopathy at L5-S1. Surgery followed in September 2020. His back improved, but he continued to report left leg pain, and his doctor referred him to pain management.
Then came a second workplace incident. In late January 2021, Slater tripped over a pallet while reaching and lifting empty boxes, falling backward onto his back. His spine specialist concluded the fall merely exacerbated his underlying back condition of lumbar spondylolisthesis. Over time, Slater also developed knee complaints, but his doctor did not link them to the workplace incidents or offer a diagnosis for the knee.
By September 2021, the doctor declared him at maximum medical improvement for his back and ordered a functional capacity evaluation. Slater was referred to a knee specialist, though no opinion was given on what was causing the knee trouble.
What followed was a prolonged tug-of-war over additional treatment. In May 2025, a trial court denied Slater's push for more left knee care, finding he had not shown enough proof that the 2021 fall was the primary cause. The Appeals Board upheld that ruling in August 2025.
A month later, Slater shifted focus. He asked the court to order ADECCO to authorize a spinal ablation procedure recommended by his treating physician, Dr. Steven Musick, and to assign a nurse case manager to help coordinate his care. He also sought penalties, fees and costs over what he called unreasonable delays in getting the procedure scheduled.
The trial court ordered the employer to move forward with the ablation but turned down everything else. As it turned out, the ablation had already been performed in October 2025, roughly two months before the judge's order and about a year after it was first recommended.
On appeal, the central question was whether an employer can be compelled to provide a nurse case manager when a doctor recommends one. The Appeals Board said no. It drew a clear distinction between nursing services as part of medical treatment and nurse case management as an administrative coordination function. Tennessee law and its regulations treat case management as something employers and insurers may offer, not something they must provide in non-catastrophic claims. The only exception is for catastrophic injuries, defined in the regulations as those involving severe paralysis, amputation, certain closed head injuries, significant burns, or total or industrial blindness.
The Board also noted that the treating physician's own language framed the nurse case manager request as a suggestion to the insurance carrier, not a medical directive. That further undercut Slater's argument that the request carried the weight of a treatment order.
On the question of delay, the Board accepted the trial court's finding that ADECCO was not solely responsible for the holdup in scheduling the ablation and that its actions were not unreasonable enough to trigger fees or penalties.
For HR teams, particularly those at staffing firms placing workers across state lines, this decision is a useful reference point. Nurse case managers can play a valuable role in steering complex claims toward better outcomes and lower costs, but in Tennessee, assigning one remains an employer's strategic decision in most cases, not a legal requirement triggered by a physician's recommendation.
The case is Slater v. ADECCO USA, Inc., No. 2020-01-0512, State File No. 49580-2020 (Tenn. Workers' Comp. App. Bd. Mar. 24, 2026).
