Please enter some keywords to search.
| Christopher S. Baker v. Middle Tn. Acoustics, Inc., et al.
01S01-9702-CH-00035
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel for the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The plaintiff/appellant, Christopher Steven Baker, appeals from the trial court's decision holding that he failed to prove that he sustained an injury while working for the defendant/appellee, Middle Tennessee Acoustic, Inc. The outcome of the case hinges primarily on a determination of the plaintiff's credibility. While our review is de novo, it is accompanied by a presumption of the correctness of the trial court's findings. Moreover, when the trial court has made a decision that hinges upon the credibility of the witnesses, it will not be disturbed on appeal unless there is in the record clear, concrete, and convincing evidence to the contrary. And, too, considerable difference is to be accorded the trial court where issues of credibility and weight of oral testimony are involved. Townsend v. State, 826 S.W.2d 434, 437 (Tenn. 1992), Airline Construction, Inc. v. Barr, 87 S.W.2d 247, 264 (Tenn. App. 199). The record is filled with contradictory and conflicting evidence regarding whether the plaintiff injured himself as he claims. The plaintiff, at trial, testified that he injured himself on Friday, June 2, 1995. Yet he alleges in his complaint that the injury was on June 5, a Monday. Records from Nashville's General Hospital reflect that he once gave June 3 as the date of his injury and later gave June 5 as the date. The plaintiff told Dr. David Gaw it was June 5. Confusion over the exact date of an injury is not unusual and failure for a worker to recall the exact date or recalling an incorrect date is usually immaterial to the outcome of the case. But the plaintiff himself emphasizes the exact date. It is important for him to prove it happened on a Friday. Wallace Harris, owner of the employer corporation, testified that the plaintiff told him he, the plaintiff, hurt himself while moving. This, of course, directly contradicts the plaintiff's testimony. But it also sheds some light on why the June 2 date surfaced at trail. By proving that he hurt himself on a Friday, the plaintiff proves that he did not hurt himself over the weekend when he moved. Ronnie Stroud was working with the plaintiff when the plaintiff says he injured himself. The plaintiff testified he told Stroud he hurt his back and that the two of them finished the work day with Stroud doing the overhead work with the plaintiff handing Stroud the materials. Stroud testified at trial that the plaintiff never complained about being hurt and that he, Stroud, never observed the plaintiff being hurt. The plaintiff had a previous work-related back injury. He denies that it was bothering him before June 2 or June 5, 1995. Yet he was scheduled for a Social Security disability examination with Dr. Gaw before June 2 or June 5. If he had no manifestation of disability - 2 -
Authoring Judge: Robe R T S. Br Andt , Senior Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. Ellen Hobbs Lyle, |
Davidson County | Workers Compensation Panel | 11/14/97 | |
| Susie Buchanan vs. Memphis Light, etc.
02A01-9610-CV-00245
Originating Judge:James E. Swearengen |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| Nelson vs. The Application Group
01A01-9703-CV-00137
|
Court of Appeals | 11/14/97 | ||
| State vs. Michael Ware
02C01-9610-CR-00354
|
Shelby County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| Kitsie Hendrix vs. James Cox, et al
02A01-9510-CV-00233
Originating Judge:Wyeth Chandler |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| Nelson vs. The Application Group
01A01-9703-CV-00137
Originating Judge:Walter C. Kurtz |
Court of Appeals | 11/14/97 | ||
| Holloway vs. Collier, Jr.
01A01-9704-CV-00153
Originating Judge:William C. Koch |
Court of Appeals | 11/14/97 | ||
| Gary Mayes vs. State
01C01-9704-CR-00137
Originating Judge:Thomas T. Woodall |
Davidson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| American Color vs. Innovo
01A01-9703-CH-00120
Originating Judge:Alex W. Darnell |
Robertson County | Court of Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| Holloway vs. Collier, Jr.
01A01-9704-CV-00153
Originating Judge:William B. Cain |
Maury County | Court of Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| State vs. Robbie James
01C01-9609-CR-00388
|
Davidson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| State vs. Carlos Coman
02C01-9611-CC-00412
Originating Judge:Whit A. Lafon |
Madison County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| American Color vs. Innovo
01A01-9703-CH-00120
Originating Judge:William C. Koch |
Court of Appeals | 11/14/97 | ||
| 03A01-9704-CV-00111
03A01-9704-CV-00111
|
Hamilton County | Supreme Court | 11/14/97 | |
| Thomas v. White
01A01-9610-CH-00479
Originating Judge:Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr. |
Davidson County | Court of Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| Walter Wills vs. Ray Gill
02A01-9607-CH-00150
Originating Judge:D. J. Alissandratos |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| Elsie Hopkins v. San Antonio Shoe, Inc.
01S01-9610-CH-00216
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. On May 2, 1994, the plaintiff, Elsie Hopkins, fell at work and injured her right shoulder. At trial and on appeal the defendant, San Antonio Shoe, Inc., accepted the claim as compensable. The trial court awarded thirty-five percent (35%) permanent partial disability to the body as a whole and assessed a bad faith penalty of twenty percent (2%) of the temporary total disability benefits due in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated _5- 6-225(k). The defendant employer contends on appeal the evidence preponderates against a vocational disability award of thirty-five percent (35%) permanent partial disability to the body as a whole and any finding of bad faith. The plaintiff requests an award of post judgment interest. For the reasons stated in this opinion, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. The scope of review of issues of fact is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of correctness of the findings, unless the preponderance of evidence is otherwise. Tennessee Code Annotated _ 5-6-225(e)(2). Lollar v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 767 S.W.2d 143 (Tenn. 1989). When a trial court has seen and heard witnesses, especially where issues of credibility and weight of oral testimony are involved, considerable deference must be accorded the trial court's factual findings. Humphrey v. David Witherspoon, Inc., 734 S.W.2d 315 (Tenn. 1987). However, where the issues involve expert medical testimony which is contained in the record by deposition, as it is in this case, then all impressions of weight and credibility must be drawn from the contents of the depositions, and the reviewing court may draw its own impression as to weight and credibility from the contents of the depositions. Overman v. Williams Sonoma, Inc., 83 S.W.2d 672, 676-77 (Tenn. 1991). Plaintiff, Elsie Hopkins, is 48 years of age and has a tenth grade education . Her prior work history consists of repetitive work in the garment and shoe industry and she has no vocational training. She was employed by the defendant, San Antonio Shoe, Inc., for approximately 8 years when she injured her right shoulder on May 2, 1994. She reported the injury to her employer and was taken by her supervisor, Paul Darrow, to be seen by Dr. Jack Milam. Dr. Milam treated her conservatively and placed her arm in a sling for 6 to 8 weeks. 2
Authoring Judge: W. Michael Maloan, Special Judge
Originating Judge:Hon. Jeffrey F. Stewart, |
Franklin County | Workers Compensation Panel | 11/14/97 | |
| 01C01-9612-CC-00517
01C01-9612-CC-00517
|
Williamson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| O.W. Winsett v. Paul Orr and Mary Orr
02A01-9605-CH-00100
This case involves the alleged breach of an oral contract for the construction of a home. The trial court granted the builder summary judgment. Because some genuine issues of material fact exist, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Originating Judge:Chancellor Floyd Peete, Jr. |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| 03A01-9704-CV-00111
03A01-9704-CV-00111
|
Hamilton County | Court of Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| Harris Hughes Jr. vs. TN Seeds, et al
02A01-9611-CV-00290
Originating Judge:Dick Jerman, Jr. |
Haywood County | Court of Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| 01C01-9612-CC-00519
01C01-9612-CC-00519
|
Williamson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| Fetterolf vs. Fetterolf
01A01-9704-JV-00171
Originating Judge:John P. Hudson |
Putnam County | Court of Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| Kenneth Rudstrom, et al vs. Ronald Terry Construction
02A01-9605-PB-00098
Originating Judge:Leonard D. Pierotti |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 11/14/97 | |
| City of Memphis vs. Civil serv. Comm., et al
02A01-9607-CH-00158
Originating Judge:C. Neal Small |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 11/14/97 |