After a thorough review of the record and authority, we conclude that the trial court erred in dismissing the petitions. The trial court’s judgments are reversed, and these cases are remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Gary W. Hardin v. Great Rivers Employment Aptitude and Technical Service, Inc., et al 02S01-9603-CH-00028
Authoring Judge: Special Judge Billy Joe White
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Joe E. Morris,
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated section 5-6-225 (e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. In this appeal, the employer contends that no notice was given by the employee. The panel concludes the judgment should be affirmed as modified. On January 16, 1995, Plaintiff began working at Young Radiator Company as a welder. (T.T. at 16). Plaintiff testified that after he had been working for a period of three weeks, he experienced pain and numbness in his left hand. (T.T. at 17-18). Plaintiff went to see Dr. Charles White of his own accord on February 6, 1995, and paid for the visit through TennCare. (T.T. at 5, 18, 51). Plaintiff testified that he continued to have pain and numbness in his hand and saw Dr. John Phillips on February 22, 1995. (T.T. at 22). Dr. Neblett first saw Plaintiff on February 27, 1995. (Neblett Depo. at 3). Following Dr. Neblett's evaluation, Plaintiff elected to have carpal tunnel release surgery, which was performed on March 9, 1995. (Neblett Depo. at 5-6). The Plaintiff testified that the pain started when he banged on metal and this was what he told his doctors. (T.T. at 61). He further testified, ". . . (b)ut I told them that I didn't know exactly, you know, if that was the cause or not, because I didn't know because I'm not a doctor." (T.T. at 61). Casual connection between the injury and work was related to the employee on March 31, 1995 by Dr. Neblett. (T.R. at 58). Written notice was provided to the employer on April 5, 1995. This panel finds that notice was given within thirty (3) days of knowledge of his injury pursuant to T.C.A. _ 5-6-21 and this case should be affirmed on this issue.
Hardin
Workers Compensation Panel
Gary W. Hardin v. Great Rivers Employment Aptitude and Technical Service, Inc., et al 02S01-9603-CH-00028
Authoring Judge: Special Judge Billy Joe White
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Joe E. Morris,
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated section 5-6-225 (e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. In this appeal, the employer contends that no notice was given by the employee. The panel concludes the judgment should be affirmed as modified. On January 16, 1995, Plaintiff began working at Young Radiator Company as a welder. (T.T. at 16). Plaintiff testified that after he had been working for a period of three weeks, he experienced pain and numbness in his left hand. (T.T. at 17-18). Plaintiff went to see Dr. Charles White of his own accord on February 6, 1995, and paid for the visit through TennCare. (T.T. at 5, 18, 51). Plaintiff testified that he continued to have pain and numbness in his hand and saw Dr. John Phillips on February 22, 1995. (T.T. at 22). Dr. Neblett first saw Plaintiff on February 27, 1995. (Neblett Depo. at 3). Following Dr. Neblett's evaluation, Plaintiff elected to have carpal tunnel release surgery, which was performed on March 9, 1995. (Neblett Depo. at 5-6). The Plaintiff testified that the pain started when he banged on metal and this was what he told his doctors. (T.T. at 61). He further testified, ". . . (b)ut I told them that I didn't know exactly, you know, if that was the cause or not, because I didn't know because I'm not a doctor." (T.T. at 61). Casual connection between the injury and work was related to the employee on March 31, 1995 by Dr. Neblett. (T.R. at 58). Written notice was provided to the employer on April 5, 1995. This panel finds that notice was given within thirty (3) days of knowledge of his injury pursuant to T.C.A. _ 5-6-21 and this case should be affirmed on this issue.
Hardin
Workers Compensation Panel
Kenneth Fuller v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Madison Industries, Inc. and Sue Ann Head, Director of The Division of Workers Compensation, Tennessee Department of Labor 02S01-9508-CV-00076
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Whit Lafon,
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. section 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. In this appeal, the employee or claimant, Fuller, contends "the trial court erred in limiting his permanent total disability award to a maximum total benefit of one hundred forty-two thousand, three hundred eighty-eight dollars ($142,388.), as opposed to ordering lifetime benefits pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. 5-6-27(4)(A), when the employee was found to be totally disabled." The Second Injury Fund (the Fund) contends the evidence preponderates against the trial court's finding that the claimant is permanently and totally disabled as a result of a work-related injury by accident. The panel concludes the judgment should be modified as provided herein. The claimant has three infirmities. He has a pre-existing avascular necrosis, which was surgically treated and from which he rehabilitated himself and worked for the employer, Madison Industries; he has carpal tunnel syndrome, which he gradually developed from repetitive use of his hands at Madison Industries; and he has Raynaud's disease or mixed connective tissue disorder, vasculitis, unrelated to any on-the-job injury. At the time of the trial, the claimant was thirty-seven years old and had a high school education and a drafting diploma. His working history includes bagging groceries, stocking shelves, operating machines, driving forklifts and production work, as well as drafting. In 1985, Dr. James Warmbrod, an orthopedic surgeon, performed hip surgery on the claimant's hips for bilateral avascular necrosis, secondary to chronic alcoholism. The same doctor performed bilateral carpal tunnel release surgery on the claimant in 1993, after the claimant developed bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome from his work for the employer. Dr. Warmbrod assigned ten percent permanent impairment to both arms and suggested that the claimant be limited to light, sedentary work and not do repetitive work with his hands. The doctor also suggested that, because of the claimant's vasculitis in both arms, which was diagnosed after he developed carpal tunnel syndrome, that he should work in a warm environment. Dr. Robert Winston, an internist, conducted an independent medical examination on June 21, 1994, after vasculitis had been diagnosed, and concluded that the claimant was permanently and totally disabled. The doctor assigned twelve to fifteen percent permanent impairment to each upper extremity and forty percent to the pre-existing hip condition. The trial court found the claimant to be permanently and totally disabled as a result of all three infirmities and awarded benefits accordingly, not to exceed $142,388., the maximum disability award allowable under the 2
Madison
Workers Compensation Panel
Gregory Leverett v. State of Tennessee 03C01-9511-CR-00362
Authoring Judge: Paul G. Summers
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Douglas A. Meyer, Judge
The appellant, Gregory Leverett, pled guilty to rape. He was sentenced to twelve years incarceration. He petitioned for post-conviction relief. The petition was dismissed as untimely. He now appeals that dismissal. We respectfully reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing.
Lisa Hughes v. Mtd Products, Inc., Cub Cadet Division 02S01-9602-CH-00019
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam
Trial Court Judge: Hon. George Ellis, Judge
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supeme 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. Lisa Hughes, ("plaintiff") has appeal ed from the judgment of the trial court denying her claim for workers' compensation benefits on the grounds that she failed to carry her burden of proof as to any permanent partial disability. On appeal, the only issue presented by plaintiff is whether the evidence preponderates against the judgment of the trial court. For the reasons hereafter stated, we find that it does not. Plaintiff was employed as an assembly line worker for MTD Products, Inc. ("defendant"), which were engaged primarily in building lawnmowers. In December 1992 she injured her neck and shoulder while lifting a lawnmower deck onto an assembly line. She was initially seen by Dr. White and then by Dr. Joseph P. Rowland, a neurosurgeon. Dr. Rowland found that her problems were muscular in origin and returned her to work with no restrictions and no permanent impairment on February 15, 1993. In April 1993, plaintiff claimed to have sustained a work-related injury to her low back while lifting a l awnmower frame onto a motor. At that time, plaintiff received outpatient treatment by Dr. Jack Pettigrew, who also referred her to Dr. Larry David Johnson, a local orthopedic surgeon. Dr. Johnson treated her as an outpatient, performing among other things x-rays, a CT scan, and myelogram, all of which were normal. On June 21, 1993, Dr. Johnson released her to return to work and confirmed that plaintiff could return to work for full duty with no permanent impairment on July 22, 1993. 2
Haywood
Workers Compensation Panel
Lisa Hughes v. Mtd Products, Inc., Cub Cadet Division 02S01-9602-CH-00019
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam
Trial Court Judge: Hon. George Ellis,
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supeme 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. Lisa Hughes, ("plaintiff") has appeal ed from the judgment of the trial court denying her claim for workers' compensation benefits on the grounds that she failed to carry her burden of proof as to any permanent partial disability. On appeal, the only issue presented by plaintiff is whether the evidence preponderates against the judgment of the trial court. For the reasons hereafter stated, we find that it does not. Plaintiff was employed as an assembly line worker for MTD Products, Inc. ("defendant"), which were engaged primarily in building lawnmowers. In December 1992 she injured her neck and shoulder while lifting a lawnmower deck onto an assembly line. She was initially seen by Dr. White and then by Dr. Joseph P. Rowland, a neurosurgeon. Dr. Rowland found that her problems were muscular in origin and returned her to work with no restrictions and no permanent impairment on February 15, 1993. In April 1993, plaintiff claimed to have sustained a work-related injury to her low back while lifting a l awnmower frame onto a motor. At that time, plaintiff received outpatient treatment by Dr. Jack Pettigrew, who also referred her to Dr. Larry David Johnson, a local orthopedic surgeon. Dr. Johnson treated her as an outpatient, performing among other things x-rays, a CT scan, and myelogram, all of which were normal. On June 21, 1993, Dr. Johnson released her to return to work and confirmed that plaintiff could return to work for full duty with no permanent impairment on July 22, 1993. 2
Haywood
Workers Compensation Panel
Danny J. Adams v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and Plumley Companies, Inc. 02S01-9512-CV-00132
Authoring Judge: Cornelia A. Clark, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. C. Creed Mcginley
This worker's compensation appeal has been referred to the special worker's compensation appeals panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _50-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law.
