Cox v. Hartford Accident

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. After conducting two separate hearings on this case, the trial court found that the plaintiff was totally and permanently disabled. The trial court further held that the insurance carrier would be liable for 75 percent of the plaintiff's disability and the Second Injury Fund would be liable for 25 percent of the plaintiff's disability. The Second Injury Fund presents the following issues for our review: I. Whether obesity is a compensable preexisting permanent physical disability to warrant recovery from the Second Injury Fund under Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-28(a). II. Whether the trial [court] erred in holding the Fund liable for 25% of the award. We reverse the judgment of the trial court holding the Second Injury Fund liable and dismiss the Second Injury Fund from this case. BACKGROUND ON THE FIRST HEARING At the time of the first hearing on June 14, 1994, the plaintiff was 33 years of age, stood over six feet tall, and weighed close to 4 pounds. He testified that most of his family is overweight and that he has always been a large person. The plaintiff's wife testified that her husband has lost some weight in the past but that he has always been heavy. After graduating from high school, the plaintiff's employment history included working as a small engine repairman, heavy equipment operator, carpenter, factory worker, meat processor, sewing machine operator, and tire builder. The plaintiff eventually returned to school and obtained an associate's degree in accounting from Draughon's College. Draughon's College placed the plaintiff with Monday Realty, where he worked over four years as a bookkeeper three days a week and as a maintenance worker two days a week. When the plaintiff was hired by Monday Realty, he weighed approximately 31 pounds. He testified that he had some normal limitations due to his weight and that his employer made accommodations for him in that respect. For example, the plaintiff did not have to do any roofing work or crawl under houses. 2