## Facts

- Janice Nixon, a Brookwood employee, suffered a compensable work-related herniated disk in July 2002.
- Brookwood selected Dr. Carter Morris as the initial authorized treating physician.
- In August 2003, Dr. Morris referred Nixon to Dr. Matthew Berke for pain management.
- After returning to work, Nixon became dissatisfied with Dr. Morris and requested a statutory “panel of four” physicians under Ala. Code § 25-5-77(a).
- Brookwood provided the panel; Nixon selected Dr. Martin Jones as her authorized treating physician.
- Dr. Jones referred Nixon to Dr. Berke for pain management; Dr. Berke referred Nixon to Dr. Ronald Moon.
- Nixon did not attend the appointment with Dr. Moon and requested another panel of four pain-management physicians.
- Brookwood declined to provide a second panel but offered a different physician in place of Dr. Moon; Nixon rejected that option.
- The trial court ordered Brookwood to provide a new panel of four pain-management physicians; Brookwood sought mandamus relief.

## Issues

1. Whether Ala. Code § 25-5-77(a) requires an employer to provide a second “panel of four” physicians after the employee has already used the panel procedure to select a new authorized treating physician, based on dissatisfaction with a referred pain-management specialist.

## Decision

- The Alabama Court of Civil Appeals granted the petition for writ of mandamus.
- The court directed the trial court to vacate its order compelling Brookwood to provide an additional panel of four pain-management physicians.
- The court held that § 25-5-77(a) did not entitle Nixon to a second panel under these circumstances.

## Legal Principles

- Ala. Code § 25-5-77(a) imposes a continuing duty on the employer to furnish reasonably necessary medical treatment for a compensable injury, including pain management.
- The statute provides a limited right for an employee dissatisfied with the employer’s initial authorized treating physician to select a replacement from a “panel of four” physicians supplied by the employer.
- After the employee exercises the panel-of-four procedure to select an authorized treating physician, the statute does not provide a recurring right to additional panels based on dissatisfaction with specialists to whom the authorized treating physician (or subsequent referrals) sends the employee.
- For mandamus to issue, the petitioner must show a clear legal right to relief, a duty on the trial court to act, the absence of an adequate alternative remedy, and proper jurisdiction; mandamus is available to correct a trial court order that conflicts with the statute’s limits.

## Conclusion

The court held that an employee who has already selected a new authorized treating physician from a statutory panel of four is not entitled to an additional panel merely because she later becomes dissatisfied with a referred pain-management specialist; mandamus was proper to vacate the order requiring a second panel.


Ex parte Brookwood Med. Ctr., Inc. (In re Nixon v. Brookwood Med. Ctr., Inc.), 895 So. 2d 1000 (Ala. Civ. App. 2004)