WORKERS COMPENSATION PANEL OPINIONS
| Beverly A. Taylor v. Ebasco Constructors, Inc. E2002-01929-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Thayer, Sp. J. Trial Court Judge: Hon. Jeffrey R. Stewart, Chancellor The trial court found the employee was permanently and totally disabled as a result of her exposure to aluminum during the course of her employment. The employer contends the evidence is not sufficient to establish a compensable work injury. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. |
Knox County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Marie Ann Burnett v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. W2003-00060-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Joe H. Walker, III, Sp.J. Trial Court Judge: Creed Mcginley, Judge The only issues submitted to the trial judge were the extent of the employee's vocational disability and whether the disability was related to the accident. Employer appeals the award of thirty percent permanent disability to the body for employee's work related accident. We affirm. |
Henry County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Jose Silva v. Martin Lumber Company, M2003-00490-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: James L. Weatherford, Sr.J. Trial Court Judge: Vernon Neal, Chancellor The employer appeals the judgment of the trial court awarding the employee 36% vocational disability to his left hand. The employer contends that the employee is not eligible for workers' compensation benefits because he is an illegal alien who committed fraud by presenting false documentation of his eligibility for employment. We find that injured worker in this case is an "employee" within the meaning of the Workers' Compensation Act. We hold that by presenting falsified documentation of employment eligibility, the employee did not make a false representation as to his physical condition and that there was no causal connection between this false representation and the injury to warrant denial of benefits. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.. |
Putnam County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Whirlpool Corporation v. Sherry Pratt M2002-02449-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Sp. J. Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Chancellor In this appeal, the employer questions the trial court's award of 75 percent disability for a serious disfigurement. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the evidence fails to preponderate against the findings of the trial court. |
Davidson County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Permanent General Insurance v. Howard E. Raymer M2002-03042-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Sp. J. Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle, Chancellor In this appeal, the appellant questions the trial court's findings that the employee's hernias were work related and the extent of his vocational disability. The appellant further contends the trial court erred in not reducing the lump sum award to its present value. As discussed below, the panel has concluded (1) the evidence fails to preponderate against the trial court's findings of fact and (2) Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-229(a) prohibits the reduction of a lump sum award to its present value. |
Davidson County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Nicole M. Sullivan v. The Yasuda Fire & Marine W2002-00857-SC-WCM-CV Authoring Judge: Allen W. Wallace, Sr. J. Trial Court Judge: Robert L. Childers, Circuit Judge The trial found the plaintiff suffered a 5 percent disability to her body as a whole as a result of injury to her leg and abdomen, obviously applying the 2 _ times multiplier to the treating physician's impairment rating. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the evidence does not preponderate against the trial court's findings and we affirm. |
Sullivan County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Gene Patton v. Sevier Coun Ty, Tennessee E2002-02004-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Howell N. Peoples, Special Judge Trial Court Judge: Rex H. Ogle, Judge The employer appeals an award of disability benefits for aggravation of a pre-existing condition where there is no detectible anatomical change. The employee challenges the sufficiency of the award and the failure to award the statutory bad faith penalty. We affirm. |
Knox County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Brian Keith Chapman v. Bekaert Steel Wire Corporation, W2002-00596-SC-WCM-CV Authoring Judge: D. J. Alissandratos, Sp.J. Trial Court Judge: C, J. Steven Stafford, Chancellor The claimant in this workers' compensation case has appealed the trial court's decision awarding him permanent partial disability benefits of twenty-five percent to the body as a whole. The trial court excluded the deposition of one of the physicians who examined the claimant but made alternative findings if the deposition were improperly excluded. The panel has concluded that the evidence preponderates against the trial court's exclusion of the deposition evidence. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court. We further find that the evidence preponderates in favor of the trial court's alternative finding of forty-five percent to the body as a whole. The trial court's judgment is modified accordingly. |
Dyer County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Kasey Dunn-Lindsey v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., d/b/a Sam's W2002-02742-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Loser, J., Sp. J. Trial Court Judge: D. J. Allisandratos, Chancellor In this appeal, the employer and its insurer insist the trial court erred in assessing a bad faith penalty, awarding attorney's fees and costs and ordering medical expenses paid directly to the injured employee. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the judgment should be affirmed as to the bad faith penalty and award of fees and costs, and remanded to the trial court for further consideration. |
Shelby County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Derrek Harper v. Gulf Insurance Company W2002-02230-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Sp. J. Trial Court Judge: Rita L. Stotts, Judge In this appeal, the injured employee insists the award of permanent partial disability benefits, limited to the medical impairment rating offered by the treating physician, is inadequate and that the trial court erred in failing to award temporary total disability and future medical benefits. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the judgment should be modified by increasing the award of permanent partial disability benefits to one based on all relevant factors established by the proof and by including temporary total and future medical benefits. |
Shelby County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Katherine Elaine Sons v. Zurich American Group 2002-02244-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Loser, Sp. J. Trial Court Judge: Martha B. Brasfield, Chancellor This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. In this appeal, the employee insists the trial court erred in its application of the successive injury rule and by applying the caps contained in Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-241(a) to the medical impairment resulting only from her most recent injury. The employer's insurer insists the evidence preponderates against the trial court's finding that the employee is permanently disabled to any extent. As discussed below, the panel concludes the successive injury rule is inapplicable and the extent of the employee's permanent disabilitymust be determined in accordance with established rules relating to pre-existing conditions. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (22 Supp.) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Vacated; Cause Remanded LOSER, SP. J., in which HOLDER, J., and GOLDIN, SP. J., joined. Joseph H. Crabtree, Jr., Stewart & Wilkinson, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Katherine Elaine Sons Ronald L. Harper and R. Scott Vincent, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellee, Zurich American Group MEMORANDUM OPINION The employee or claimant, Ms. Sons, initiated this civil action to recover workers' compensation benefits for a work related back injury. The employer's insurer, Zurich American, denied liability. After a trial on the merits, the trial court awarded the employee, among other things, permanent partial disability benefits based on 1 percent to the body as a whole. The employee has appealed contending the award is inadequate. Appellate review is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of correctness of the findings of fact, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225 (e)(2). This tribunal is not bound by the trial court's findings but instead conducts an independent examination of the record to determine where the preponderance lies. Galloway v. Memphis Drum Serv., 822 S.W.2d 584, 586 (Tenn. 1991). Where the trial judge has seen and heard the witnesses, especially if issues of credibility and weight to be given oral testimony are involved, considerable deference must be accorded those circumstances on review, because it is the trial court which had the opportunity to observe the witnesses' demeanor and to hear the in- court testimony. Long v. Tri-Con Ind., Ltd., 996 S.W.2d 173, 178 (Tenn. 1999). The appellate tribunal, however, is as well situated to gauge the weight, worth and significance of deposition testimony as the trial judge. Walker v. Saturn Corp., 986 S.W.2d 24, 27 (Tenn. 1998). Extent of vocational disability is a question of fact. Story v. Legion Ins. Co., 3 S.W.3d 45, 456 (Tenn. 1999). Conclusions of law are subject to de novo review on appeal without any presumption of correctness. Nutt v. Champion Intern. Corp., 98 S.W.2d 365, 367 (Tenn. 1998). The claimant is sixty years old and has a tenth grade education. She obtained a GED certificate in about 1973, but has no other formal education. She began working in 1979 at a nuclear power station. Her job was to wash protective clothing. Later in the same year, she began working as a labor foreman in construction work. Her work through 199 consisted of very strenuous, very heavy labor. Her duties included, but were not limited to running conduit and wiring in buildings. She returned to Covington in 199 and tended a bar. In 1994, she was hired by Dyncorp, a general maintenance company which performed general maintenance at the old navy base in Millington. Around June 1, 1998, the maintenance contract was awarded to J. A. Jones Management, at which time the claimant went to work for the employer, J. A. Jones. She worked mostly with electrical lines and performed many of the duties that an electrical worker with Memphis Light, Gas & Water would perform. She would roll and unroll lines, replace poles, replace lights and fixtures inside buildings and install new wiring. She also worked with air conditioners, replacing filters and cleaning ducts. All of the tasks were heavy and strenuous work requiring lifting, bending, twisting, turning, etc. In May 1998, the claimant developed foot problems and underwent a surgical procedure on her feet. After this surgical procedure, she began experiencing back pain. A diagnostic test revealed a ruptured disc. At the time, neither the foot problems nor the back problems were work related. On May 18, 1998, Dr. Dowen E. Snyder performed corrective surgery on her lower back, removing large fragments of disc at two levels. She returned to work in July of the same year. However, she experienced pain both during and after work. On September 15, 1998, the claimant returned to Dr. Snyder with complaints of recurrent pain in her back and left hip and leg. She also described an incident involving a fall from a treadmill, in which she landed on her lower back. The treadmill event caused no additional pain. The doctor prescribed an epidural block, medication, rest and therapy. When the pain didn't wane, Dr. Snyder ordered a second magnetic imaging resonance test. On September 3, 1998, the claimant stepped in a hole at work and suffered immediate and -2- |
Tipton County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Bobby J. Laxton v. State of Tennessee E2002-02281-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Thayer, Sp. J. Trial Court Judge: Vance W. Cheek, Jr., Commissioner The Claims Commissioner sustained a motion for summary judgment in favor of the employer and held the action was not timely filed within the one year period of time allowed by the statute of limitations. The employee contends he filed the claim within one year of his becoming aware he was disabled to work. Judgment of the Claims Commission is affirmed. |
Knox County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Bobby J. Laxton v. State of Tennessee E2002-02281-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Roger E. Thayer, Special Judge Trial Court Judge: The Claims Commissioner sustained a motion for summary judgment in favor of the employer and held the action was not timely filed within the one year period of time allowed by the statute of limitations. The employee contends he filed the claim within one year of his becoming aware he was disabled to work. Judgment of the Claims Commission is affirmed. |
Knox County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Kathy D Avenport v. Wa L-Mart Superc Enter E2002-02156-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Howell N. Peoples, Special Judge Trial Court Judge: G. Richard Johnson, Chancellor The employer asserts the trial court erred in adopting the medical impairment rating of the evaluating physician rather than the opinion of the treating physician. We affirm. |
Knox County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| John William Jones v. Conagra Grocery Products W2002-01947-SC-WCM-CV Authoring Judge: Allen W. Wallace, Sr. J. Trial Court Judge: George R. Ellis, Chancellor The trial court determined that: (1) the employee is 1% disabled and that he is limited by Tenn. Code Ann. 5-6-27(4)(A)(i) to 26 weeks of benefits; and (2) the employer is entitled to a reduction for the Social Security payments made on behalf of the employee totaling $25,296.. The employer was ordered to continue to be liable for employee's medical treatment for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in accordance with the workers' compensation law. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the judgment should be affirmed. |
Gibson County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Mahle, Inc. v. Terry Reese E2002-1199-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Howell N. Peoples, Special Judge Trial Court Judge: Thomas Frierson, Ii, Chancellor The issues are the amount of the award and whether the trial court erroneously applied the doctrine of intervening cause. We affirm. |
Knox County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Diana J. Neese v. Shoney's Inc. M2002-01277-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: James L. Weatherford, Sr.J. Trial Court Judge: John A. Turnbull, Judge This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. In this case, the trial court found that the employee had sustained a 75% vocational disability to each extremityfor bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome caused by her work activity. The employer argues that this award is excessive and preponderates against the evidence. For the reasons set out in this opinion, We affirm the judgment of the trial court. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court Affirmed JAMES L. WEATHERFORD, SR.J., in which FRANK F. DROWOTA, III, C.J., and JOE C. LOSER, JR., SP.J., joined. Mark A. Baugh, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Shoney's Inc. Kelly R. Williams, Livingston, Tennessee, for the appellee, Diana J. Neese. MEMORANDUM OPINION Ms. Diana Neese was 51 years old at the time of trial. She has a ninth grade education, but later earned her GED in 1984. She lives in rural Tennessee near the border of Clay County and Overton County, although she has a Hilham, Tennessee street address. She has worked primarily as a cook for retirement centers and a public school system since she started working in 196. She has worked as a backline cook for several fast food restaurants. She has also worked as a cashier, an assembly line worker, and child care worker. In August of 1999, Ms. Neese began working at Shoney's in Cookeville as a salad bar attendant. In this job, she was responsible for maintaining the salad bar by carrying out trays of food, big pots of soup, bowls, and plates. In February of 2, Ms. Neese started experiencing problems with her hands: "My hands and arms were hurting, going numb and tingling, and I kept dropping things." She stated she had never had any problems with her hands or wrists prior to February of 2. On March 22, 2, she saw her primary care physician, Dr. Mauricio, complaining of numbness in her arms, which started at her elbow. Dr. Mauricio, then referred her to Dr. Robert Nelson. On April 17, 2, Dr. Nelson diagnosed Ms. Neese with bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome. On April 28, 2, Ms. Neese informed Mr. Jimmy Price, manager at Shoney's, that she had carpal tunnel syndrome. Dr. Nelson performed surgery on her right wrist on May 31, 2 and operated on her left wrist on June 3, 2. On November 7, 2, Ms. Janet K. Patterson, physical therapist administered Ms. Neese's functional capacity evaluation. Ms. Patterson indicated that Ms. Neese would not use her fingers for fine motor tasks, would take frequent rests and would not use her arms for reaching more than 3 seconds at a time during the test. According to Ms. Patterson, test results indicated 1) inconsistent or sub-maximal effort on grip strength and push tests; and 2) that her heart rate did not correlate with reported levels of pain. On November 16, 2, Dr. Nelson released Ms. Neese to return to work light- duty and assigned restrictions of no lifting over 1 to 12 pounds and no repetitive lifting of 5 to 7 pounds on a regular basis, and no repetitive motions with her hands. Ms. Neese returned to Dr. Nelson on January 2, 2, still complaining of some pain in her hands with weakness and numbness. Dr. Nelson found she had reached maximum medical improvement and assigned the same restrictions on a permanent basis. Dr. Nelson found that Ms. Neese has sustained a 3% permanent partial impairment to each hand. Dr. Nelson indicated there are different factors that relate to the level of pain you can expect from patients after a bilateral carpal tunnel release. He listed one factor as what the surgeon finds at the time of surgery----"[F]or instance, in her case where I described that the median nerve as it was coming underneath that ligament, it was really adherent or adhered to the ligament, ... I had to do what is called a neurolysis, which means that you have to take a nerve once you kind of separate it off the ligament and actually try to release pressure on the individual fibers of the nerve. In her case that was necessary. Sometimes that is not necessary. So, all of that has to do with the prognosis of what you expect the future to be for that particular patient." As to Ms. Neese's prognosis, Dr. Nelson stated ".... essentially on both sides [of] the median nerve I found that she had quite a bit of compression on the nerve. So, from that standpoint, I felt that she may not recover as much as some do that have that type of surgery. So, I was a little bit -2- |
Putnam County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Willie Jason Christopher v. Plumley Marugo Limited W2002-02007-SC-WCM-CV Authoring Judge: Robert L. Childers, Sp.J. Trial Court Judge: Julian P. Guinn, Judge The appellant presents the following issue for review: Whether the trial court erred in finding that the expert medical testimony established that the plaintiff's injury and/or medical impairment arose out of and in the course of his employment with the defendant. |
Henry County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Stephanie Sansom v. Lookout Knitwear, Llc, E2002-02226-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Roger E. Thayer, Sp. J. Trial Court Judge: Hon. W. Frank Brown III, Chancellor The trial court awarded the employee 6 percent permanent partial disability to her left arm and found her shoulder injury to be compensable but no permanent injury. The judgment is affirmed as to the award of 6 percent disability to the arm and the allowance of temporary total disability benefits; the judgment is reversed as to the shoulder injury and the commutation of periodic benefits; and the judgment allowing reimbursement of medical expenses is modified. |
Knox County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Adana Carter v. Utica Mutual Insurance Company E2002-01779-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Thayer, Sp. J. Trial Court Judge: W. Frank Brown III, Chancellor The trial court sustained a motion for summary judgment in favor of the employer and held that the injury did not occur within the course of employment. The employee contends she was required to make the trip in question and was on a special mission and that the usual rule of noncompensability in going to or coming from work did not apply. The judgment is reversed as the injury occurred on the return trip which was a special errand or mission for the benefit of the employer. |
Carter County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Janice Darnell v. Royal and Sunalliance, M2002-00617-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Sp. J. Trial Court Judge: Robert E. Corlew, Chancellor In this case of first impression, the employee contends the trial court erred in setting aside a court approved settlement as being contrary to law and grounded on mistake of fact. As discussed below, the panel has concluded there was no mistake as to an existing fact and that Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-241(a)(2) does not authorize an employer or its insurer to obtain reconsideration of a lump sum award of permanent partial disability benefits. |
Rutherford County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Cora Jean Earls v. Calsonic Yorozu Corporation, Inc. M2002-01309-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Sp. J. Trial Court Judge: Charles D. Haston, Chancellor In this appeal, the employer insists (1) the evidence preponderates against the trial court's findings as to notice, permanency, causation and extent of permanency, (2) the trial court erred in the application of Tenn. Code Ann. __ 5-6-27(3) and 5-6-241; (3) the trial court erred by delegating its adjudicatory function to the Clerk and Master, and (4) the trial court erred in assessing discretionary costs against the defendant. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the award of permanent partial disability benefits should be reduced to one based on two and one-half times the employee's medical impairment rating, or 3 percent to the body as a whole. |
Warren County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Brinda J. Hill v. Arcade Marketing Printing, Inc. E2002-01936-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Byers, Sr. J. Trial Court Judge: W. Frank Brown, III, Chancellor The plaintiff appeals the trial court's decision resolving all issues in favor of the defendant and dismissing the plaintiff's complaint, finding specifically: that the plaintiff failed to give proper, statutorily required notice of her alleged injuries; that the plaintiff's alleged injuries were not causally related to her job with the defendant company; and that the plaintiff was estopped from pursuing workers' compensation benefits for her alleged injuries. We affirm the judgment of the Chancery Court. |
Knox County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Tommy Carey v. Camden Castings W2002-01367-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Allen W. Wallace, Sr.J. Trial Court Judge: C. Creed McGiley, Circuit Judge The trial court found this action barred by the statute of limitations. We affirm the trial court. |
Benton County | Workers Compensation Panel | ||
| Angelina Gilley v. Express Check Advance, W2002-02506-WC-R3-CV Authoring Judge: Allen W. Wallace, Sr. J. Trial Court Judge: Joe C. Morris, Chancellor The trial court found that the employee was permanently and totally disabled through age sixty-five as a result of compensable injuries, including a herniated disk and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. In this appeal, the employer questions the court's findings as to causation, amount of disability, temporary benefits and medical benefits. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the evidence fails to preponderate against the findings of the trial court. Therefore, We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Madison County | Workers Compensation Panel |