Stanley Bridges v. Liberty Insurance Company of

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. The chancellor ruled that the plaintiff suffered from pneumoconiosis and that the two physicians who testified the plaintiff had the condition were more credible than the physician who testified he did not. However, the judge found the plaintiff failed to carry the burden of showing he was totally and permanently disabled from the pneumoconiosis; therefore, an award could not be made under the guidelines as expressed in the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969 and adopted by the Tennessee General Assembly in Tennessee Code Annotated _ 5-6-32 et. seq. However, the chancellor ruled that even though the evidence and circumstances did not support an award of one hundred percent permanent total disability under the coal worker's pneumoconiosis provisions, the court could still award permanent partial disability under the general occupational diseases provisions of the Tennessee Worker's Compensation Act. TENN. CODE ANN. _ 5-6- 31. The court then found the plaintiff suffered from coal miner's pneumoconiosis arising out of and in the course and scope of his employment with the defendant and also found the condition causally linked to the plaintiff's exposure to conditions and hazards of his employment. The plaintiff was found to be one hundred percent disabled from a combination of his arthritic condition and pneumoconiosis; however, the disabilityattributable to pneumoconiosis was found much less significant than the non- compensable arthritic disability, resulting in an award of fifteen percent permanent partial disability to the bodyas a whole. We affirm the chancellor's finding that the plaintiff's pneumoconiosis is not totally disabling but reverse the award of permanent partial disability benefits. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Affirmed in part; Reversed in part and Dismissed JOHN K. BYERS, SR. J., in which E. RILEY ANDERSON, and ROGER E. THAYER, SP. J., joined. Linda J. Hamilton Mowles, Knoxville, Tennessee for the appellant, Security Insurance Company of Hartford David H. Dunaway and Frank Q. Vettori, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Stanley Bridges MEMORANDUM OPINION The review of the findings of fact made by the trial court is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of the correctness of the finding, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. TENN. CODE ANN. _ 5-6-225(e)(2); Stone v. City of McMinnville, 896 S.W.2d 548, 55 (Tenn. 1995). The application of this standard requires this Court to weigh in more depth the factual findings and conclusions of the trial courts in workers' compensation cases. See Corcoran v. Foster Auto GMC, Inc., 746 S.W.2d 452, 456 (Tenn. 1988). Facts The plaintiff, forty-seven years of age at the time of trial, has a high school diploma. His work history consists of coal mining and work at the mines as a night watchman. His duties in these positions required him to shovel coal dust, pick rock, sweep, and, when in the mines, be exposed to mine effluence. He has also operated a variety of equipment and loaded supplies to take into the deep mine; when working at strip mining he would shoot powder and also work as a drill operator. The plaintiff last worked in the mines in the fall of 1989. In 1986 the plaintiff was diagnosed with rheumatoid arthritis. As a result, the plaintiff was off work for part of 1986 and all of 1987. During that time, the plaintiff was under medical treatment in which he received gold shots and steroids. He returned to the mine as a night watchman but eventually became unable to perform those duties, and he has not been able to work since leaving his last position with the defendant. The plaintiff admitted he quit working for the defendant because of his rheumatoid arthritis, not because of his breathing difficulties. The plaintiff's wife, who testified at trial, also stated he quit working in the mines because of the rheumatoid arthritis symptoms. The plaintiff testified he does not currently know of any work he could do because of his breathing problems and his arthritis_he gets out of breath very easily and coughs and spits up sputum often; he has painfullyswollen joints on his hands and painful knots on his feet. He mainly watches television, goes for short walks and washes dishes sometimes. He testified the arthritis from which he suffers keeps him from doing just about anything, including at times such everyday tasks as holding a coffee cup, brushing his hair, buttoning his clothes and getting out of the bathtub. He cannot engage in any hobbies or activities that involve reaching overhead or behind. -2-