APPELLATE COURT OPINIONS | Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts

Please enter some keywords to search.

COURT

COUNTY

AUTHORING JUDGE

ORIGINATING JUDGE

CASE NUMBER

DATE FILTER

SEARCH TITLE

SEARCH CASE SUMMARY

X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX		Court of Appeals	10/21/96
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX		Court of Appeals	10/21/96
In April 1989. In The Present Appeal, The Petitioner, Relying In Part Upon State v. Roger 02C01-9610-CC-00333	Lake County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/21/96
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX		Court of Appeals	10/21/96
State v. Roger Dale Hill, No. 01C01-9508-Cc-00267 (Tenn. Crim. App. June 20, 1996), 02C01-9610-CC-00335	Lake County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/21/96
State vs. John Wayne Slate 03C01-9511-CC-00352	Sevier County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/18/96
01A01-9603-PB-00093 01A01-9603-PB-00093 Originating Judge:James R. Everett	Davidson County	Court of Appeals	10/18/96
State vs. John Wayne Slate 03C01-9511-CC-00352	Sevier County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/18/96
01A01-9604-CH-00149 01A01-9604-CH-00149 Originating Judge:Ellen Hobbs Lyle		Court of Appeals	10/18/96
01A01-9604-CH-00191 01A01-9604-CH-00191 Originating Judge:Ellen Hobbs Lyle	Davidson County	Court of Appeals	10/18/96
03C01-9512-CC-00381 03C01-9512-CC-00381	Sevier County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/18/96
Honorable Hamilton v. Gayden, Jr., Judge 01A01-9605-CV-00201 Originating Judge:Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.	Davidson County	Court of Appeals	10/18/96
01A01-9602-CV-00070 01A01-9602-CV-00070 Originating Judge:Thomas W. Brothers	Davidson County	Court of Appeals	10/18/96
03C01-9506-CR-00169 03C01-9506-CR-00169 Originating Judge:James C. Witt	Campbell County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/18/96
01A01-9604-CH-00181 01A01-9604-CH-00181 Originating Judge:Gerald L. Ewell, Sr.	Coffee County	Court of Appeals	10/18/96
Donna Forrester v. Oshkosh B'Gosh and Travelers Insurance Company 01S01-9511-JP-00206 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. Authoring Judge: Cornelia A. Clark, Special Judge Originating Judge:Hon. Anthony L. Sanders	Humphreys County	Workers Compensation Panel	10/17/96
01C01-9512-CC-00416 01C01-9512-CC-00416 Originating Judge:Donald P. Harris	Hickman County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/17/96
02C01-9510-CC-00315 02C01-9510-CC-00315	Madison County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/17/96
01C01-9404-CC-00120 01C01-9404-CC-00120 Originating Judge:Jim T. Hamilton	Maury County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/17/96
Barbara Ann Holt v. Royal Insurance Company and Ckr Industries, Inc. 01SO1-9505-CH-00071 This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special W orkers' 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. Our review is de novo on the record accompanied by a presumption that the findings of fact of the trial court are correct unless the evidence preponderates otherwise. TENN. CODE ANN. _ 5-6-225(e)(2). The trial court awarded Ms. Holt $13,196.8 permanent partial disability benefits, representing eighty (8) weeks at the benefit rate of $164.96 per week, or twenty percent (2%) to the body as a whole; and future medical benefits pursuant to the Tennessee Workers' Compensation Act. The trial court also allowed attorneys fees of twenty percent (2%) of the award, in the amount of $2,639.36, to be paid in lump sum. The appellant contends that the trial court erred in: 1. Finding that a vocational disability based upon a permanent medical restriction, with medical testimony of no medical impairment rating in accordance with A.M.A. Guidelines for Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, constitutes a compensable permanent partial disability under the Workers' Compensation Act. 2. Awarding permanent partial disability benefits to the Plaintiff that were excessive and against the weight of the evidence. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. Ms. Holt filed her complaint in the Chancery Court for Franklin County, Tennessee, against her employer, Defendant CKR Industries, seeking to recover unpaid benefits under the Tennessee Workers' Compensation Act for work-related injuries. Ms. Holt alleged that she suffered injuries as a result of exposure to chemicals in use at the CKR Plant. The case was consolidated with three (3) other cases for trial due to significant similarities in the cases. The opinion of the Court on the first issue is contained in the case of Angela K. Hill v. Royal Insurance Company and CKR Industries, Inc., No. 1S1-955-CH-71, filed simultaneously with this opinion. The Court held that the trial court did not err in finding that a vocational disability existed based upon the testimony of the medical experts that a permanent medical restriction existed which constitutes a permanent partial disability under the Worker's Compensation Act, even though no medical impairment rating was given by any of the medical experts. Authoring Judge: Robert L. Childers, Special Judge Originating Judge:Hon. Jeffrey F. Stewart	Franklin County	Workers Compensation Panel	10/17/96
01C01-9511-CC-00381 01C01-9511-CC-00381 Originating Judge:Henry Denmark Bell	Williamson County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/17/96
02C01-9512-CR-00375 02C01-9512-CR-00375	Shelby County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/17/96
Helen Carroll v. Moore and Associates and Travelers Insurance Company 01S01-9512-CV-00221 Authoring Judge: William S. Russell, Special Judge Originating Judge:HON. JOHN W. ROLLINS, JUDGE	Carroll County	Workers Compensation Panel	10/17/96
Kerry Alan Napier v. Cincinnati Casualty Insurance Company and North Central Telephone Cooperative 01S01-9604-CH-00063 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 issue in this case is whether the award of 75 percent disability to the plaintiff's right hand is in accord with the preponderance of proof. Appellate review is confined to a review de novo on the record, accompanied by a presumption that the trial judge's findings of fact are correct unless the evidence otherwise preponderates. T.C.A. _ 5-6-225(e)(2). A concomitant rule is that we are as enabled as the trial judge to judge the probative worth of depositional testimony. Landers v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., 775 S.W.2d 355, 356 (Tenn. 1989). The plaintiff's job with the telephone company was that of a cable splicer and repairman. During the course of his employment, he sustained a laceration to the extensor tendon of his right hand, on October 25, 1994, involving the index, middle and ring fingers, which was repaired by Dr. Keith Morrison, an orthopedic surgeon in Bowling Green, Kentucky, under whose care he remained until February 22, 1995. On that date, Dr. Morrison noted: Mr. Napier is now 4 months status post extensor tendon repair on his right hand. Four tendons repaired to the index finger, slips to the middle and ring finger on the right hand. His EXAM today shows some improvement. He still lacks full extension on the index finger by about 2dg when his wrist is brought into extension. With the wrist in the flexed position, he has full extension of the hand. He has full flexion of all the digits with his only limitation being the lack of full extension on the index finger with his wrist in the above mentioned extension position. They would like to get a second opinion for insurance reasons so we are going to see him back in 1 month. At that time he will be 5 months out. I recommend tenolysis exploration. If he is still dissatisfied with the result. Overall, he has made a big improvement, having had no active extension of the fingers on repair. He remains neurovascularly intact. Otherwise, no loss of sensation. The plaintiff was later seen, on March 15, 1995 by Dr. Stephen Pratt, a specialist in reconstructive hand surgery, because of a 3 degree lag in the index finger. Further tendon repairs were undertaken to correct the lag. Dr. Pratt testified 2 Authoring Judge: William H. Inman, Senior Judge Originating Judge:Hon. C.K. Smith,	Macon County	Workers Compensation Panel	10/17/96
01C01-9512-CC-00431 01C01-9512-CC-00431	Robertson County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/17/96