Mable Calhoun v. Quebecor Printing, Inc.

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. The defendant appeals the trial court's decision to award the plaintiff temporary total disability benefits for the period of May 19, 1999, through January 5, 2, and to award fifty- five percent permanent partial disability to the body as a whole. We affirm the decision of the trial court. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Sullivan County Chancery Court is Affirmed BYERS, SR.J., in which ANDERSON, J., and THAYER, SP.J., joined. Steven H. Trent, of Johnson City, Tennessee, for Appellant, Quebecor Printing, Inc. Tony A. Seaton, of Johnson City, Tennessee, for Appellee, Mable Calhoun. MEMORANDUM OPINION 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 was fifty-eight years of age at the time of trial. She has completed the tenth grade and also has earned a general equivalency degree. She has no vocational or specialized training. She is married and her husband is retired. They have no dependent children. The plaintiff began working for the defendant company in 1983. The company, which was then known as Kingsport Press, Inc., is primarily engaged in the manufacture of books. In her seventeen years with the defendant company, the plaintiff worked in a variety of positions. At the time of the injury that is the basis for her claim in this case, she was employed as a sewing machine operator. The plaintiff testified that on July 27, 1997, she was attempting to move a palate or "skid," which was part of the duties of her position. While doing so, her foot became caught between two of the palates, causing her to fall and injure her back and right leg. She reported her injury to her supervisor and worked the remainder of her shift. The evening of the accident, the plaintiff went to the emergency room and was diagnosed with a lumbosacral strain. In the days following the July 27 accident, the plaintiff continued to work but experienced pain in increasing frequency and severity, so her supervisor offered her a panel of three physicians from which to choose a physician to see. The plaintiff chose Dr. John Marshall and first saw him on July 3, 1997, for examination and treatment. Dr. Marshall placed several temporary work restrictions on the plaintiff and returned her to work. The plaintiff continued to see Dr. Marshall throughout 1997. After months of the plaintiff's continued working under restrictions while receiving treatment, Dr. Marshall determined that she had reached maximum medical improvement on January 26, 1998, and assessed permanent partial disability at ten percent to the body as a whole. During her course of treatment with Dr. Marshall, the plaintiff also saw Dr. Fred Killeffer, a neurosurgeon. Dr. Killeffer examined the plaintiff and agreed with Dr. Marshall's assessment of a ten percent impairment to the body as a whole. The plaintiff continued to have severe pain in her back and right leg, but Dr. Marshall and Dr. Killeffer recommended against surgery. The plaintiff then sought treatment from Dr. Gregory Corradino, a non-panel physician. Contrary to the opinions of Dr. Marshall and Dr. Killeffer, Dr. Corradino recommended surgery be performed on the plaintiff's back. This surgery was not authorized by her employer. She continued to work for the defendant company until May 19, 1999, when she left work for the unauthorized surgery. On May 27, 1999, Dr. Corradino performed a hemi-laminotomy and diskectomy on the plaintiff. Following the plaintiff's surgery, she testified that her condition was relatively unchanged, and that the surgery provided no significant improvement in her symptoms. Dr. Corradino found that the plaintiff had reached maximum medical improvement "relative to her surgery", on January 5, 2. He assessed her a fifteen percent impairment to the body as a whole. She continued to see -2-