Elizabeth A. Wilson v. Worthco, Inc., et al 02S01-9712-CH-00113
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Senior Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. William Michael Maloan,
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 trial judge found the plaintiff had suffered a compensable injury and entered a judgment in her favor of 5 percent vocational impairment to the body as a whole. The defendant raises the following issues: I. Whether the trial court erred in rejecting Defendant's Motion to Dismiss on grounds that the statute of limitations had expired prior to the filing of Plaintiff's claim. II. Whether the trial court erred in finding that Plaintiff's alleged injury was compensable and not a non-compensable aggravation of a pre-existing condition. III. Whether the trial court erred in finding that the Plaintiff sustained a fifty percent (5%) permanent partial disability to the body as a whole. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. 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 findings, 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 court in a workers' compensation case. See Corcoran v. Foster Auto GMC, Inc., 746 S.W.2d 452, 456 (Tenn. 1988).
Robbie Bickers v. Cigna Insurance Company 02S01-9710-CH-00097
Authoring Judge: F. Lloyd Tatum, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. D. J. Alissandratos, 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. The complaint filed by the plaintiff, Robbie Bickers, alleges that on February 24, 1996 he was injured while employed for Parsec, Inc. at its Memphis, Tennessee rail yard. The complaint further charges that, as a result of the accident, he sustained injuries to his arms, chest, neck, and back. After considering the evidence, the chancellor found that the plaintiff failed to carry the burden of proof and rendered judgment in favor of the defendant, CIGNA Insurance Company, which is the workers' compensation carrier for the plaintiff's employer. In his only issue, the plaintiff states: Whether the proof supports a finding that the plaintiff suffered a compensable injury to his right wrist for which he retains permanent impairment. Since the issue presented to us questions only the action of the trial judge in failing to compensate plaintiff for permanent impairment to the right wrist, we will not elaborate in this opinion on the evidence concerning the other alleged injuries of the plaintiff. On February 24, 1996, plaintiff was operating a "yard mule," which is a half- truck. While removing heavy loads from a railcar, a container box separated from the frame, lifting plaintiff's truck-tractor rig off the ground and then slamming it back on the ground, allegedly injuring the plaintiff. The plaintiff was taken to the St. Joseph Hospital emergency room in Memphis and was treated briefly by Drs. Vernon Miller and Thomas Fowlkes. These doctors later referred the plaintiff to Dr. Mark Harriman, an orthopedic surgeon, who continued to treat the plaintiff. He was later examined by Dr. Joseph C. Boals, on two occasions. The plaintiff testified that because of his wrist injury, he had a lack of grip and "catching." He stated that due to this he could not use a hammer or turn wrenches. He also complained of difficulty with his back and shoulder. 2
Shelby
Workers Compensation Panel
Cherre Howard v. Granite State Ins. Co. 01S01-9708-CH-00179
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Ellen Hobbs Lyle,
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. The employer's insurer, Granite State Insurance Company, contends the chancellor erred in awarding permanent partial benefits based on sixty-five percent to the body as a whole. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the judgment should be affirmed. Our 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. section 5-6-225(e)(2). The extent of an injured worker's vocational disability is an issue of fact. Jaske v. Murray Ohio Mfg. Co., Inc., 75 S.W.2d 15 (Tenn. 1988). The employee or claimant, Cherre Howard, is sixty-four years old and has a high school education and experience in collections and clerical work. For the sixteen years preceding her injury, she worked as a collector for Professional Adjustment Service. On February 29, 1996, she fell down a flight of stairs while leaving work, dislocating her left shoulder. She later reported to the emergency room at Southern Hills Hospital, where a physician fractured both bones in her forearm, while unsuccessfully attempting to manipulate her shoulder into its socket. She subsequently saw another doctor at the same hospital, who twice performed open surgery to cure the injuries. The claimant returned to the operating doctor for follow-up care and he ultimately released her with an estimated eight percent permanent whole body impairment rating. However, the doctor concedes the claimant's condition worsened after he last saw her. When her condition worsened, she was referred to Dr. Allen Anderson, who assigned a permanent whole person impairment rating of nineteen percent and who restricted her from lifting more than ten pounds, from lifting any weight frequently and from pushing, pulling or climbing. The doctor diagnosed arthrofibrosis and a torn rotator cuff, which could not be repaired because of lack of bone. He testified the claimant could not use her injured arm. The chancellor, giving greater weight to Dr. Anderson's opinion, first awarded disability benefits based on seventy percent to the body as a whole, then reduced the award to one based on sixty-five percent to the body as a whole. The claimant has returned to work, but earns less than before the accident. The employer's insurer insists the chancellor erred in accepting the opinion of Dr. Anderson, who saw the claimant only once, instead of the opinion of the operating surgeon and because the claimant has been reasonably successful in her return to work. The employee insists the testimony of the operating surgeon can be discounted because her condition admittedly worsened 2
Davidson
Workers Compensation Panel
Young vs. Young 01A01-9801-CH-00047
Trial Court Judge: John W. Rollins
