WPC8L  0~V 0x 0kL 0k 0" 0~ 0: 0 0 0 0  0 01 0C 0V( 0~ 0M 0 0 0X 0 0 0 0KUB %0 0z6 0 1 0 r 0= 0F 0P 1V 0 0O$#Es# 0}u# 0x# 0j$ 0j$ 0ea% 0W% 0W& 0t& 0j& 0b' 0( 0( 0w) 0X* 0L+ 0S, 0-m- 0@. 0/ 00 0#1 01 0^2 03 03 0l4 04 15?6nO6 046 B074M7 0a7^7 0J\8849<9UPD9 0@9 D39w@: 0JG: 0T: 0^: 0hC; 0r; 0|< 0< 0= 1u= 0d$>U6>B)>DC> AM*?U *w??f@"A2Bv~BCvD AOJJ 0DK D/K BLV& 8Document[8]Document Style0..8` ..` V8Document[4]Document Style.. . V 8Document[6]Document Style8..V 8Document[5]Document Style0..V/8Document[2]Document Style 2A.3  Ԁ   V& 8Document[7]Document Style0..0` ..` zU :Right Par[1]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..2I.3  Ԁ..0..zh :Right Par[2]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..2A.3  Ԁ..0` ..` V?8Document[3]Document Style.. 21.3  Ԁ   z{ :Right Par[3]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  ..P 21.3  Ԁ` ..` 0 .. z :Right Par[4]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. .. 2a.3  Ԁ .. 0..z :Right Par[5]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..2(1)3  Ԁ..0h..hz :Right Par[6]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h..2(a)3  Ԁh..h0..z :Right Par[7]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h....2i)3  Ԁ..0..z :Right Par[8]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h....p..2a)3  Ԁ..0p..pVX8Document[1]Document Style  @..8  2I.3  Ԁ     Ԉ l2:Technical[5]Technical Document Style.. 2(1)3  Ԁ. l2:Technical[6]Technical Document Style.. 2(a)3  Ԁ. l/%:Technical[2]Technical Document Style 2A.3  Ԁ   .. l,!:Technical[3]Technical Document Style 21.3  Ԁ   .. l(!:Technical[4]Technical Document Style 2a.3  Ԁ   .. l:0:Technical[1]Technical Document Style  2I.3  Ԁ     .. l1:Technical[7]Technical Document Style.. 2i)3  Ԁ. l1:Technical[8]Technical Document Style.. 2a)3  Ԁ. <6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXR& 8BibliogrphyBibliography0....jo4Tech InitInitialize Technical StyleS   1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 S CuyTechnicalTechnical Document Style11.11.1.11.1.1.11.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1fp2Doc InitInitialize Document StyleS #    I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)S !"($0 ($0 0 (($0 0 0   A_ekqwDocumentDocument StyleI.1.A.a.(1)(a)i)a)x?t2PleadingHeader for Numbered Pleading Paper % z &(  &XXXXX6G''*d66G''*d6HH1HH2HH3HH4HH5HH6HH7HH8HH910111213141516171819202122232425262728  .+('2$ FT!   p4Heading 2Underlined Heading Flush LeftV4Heading 1Centered Heading@..  b* 8Bullet ListIndented Bullet List0..0` ..` B& $1Document Style0..8` ..` B $2Document Style.. . B $3Document Style8..B $4Document Style0..B-$5Document Style 23  Ԁ   B& $6Document Style0..0` ..` dS $7Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..23  Ԁ..0..df $8Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..` 23  Ԁ..0` ..` B=$9Document Style.. 23  Ԁ   fy &10Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. 23  Ԁ` ..` 0 .. f &11Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..23  Ԁ .. 0..f &12Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h23  Ԁ..0h..hf &13Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h..23  Ԁh..h0..f &14Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h....23  Ԁ..0..f &15Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers..` ..`  .. ..h..h....p..p23  Ԁ..0p..pDV!&16Document Style  @..  23  Ԁ     Ԉ X/&17Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. X/&18Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. X-(&19Technical Document Style 23  Ԁ   .. X*$&20Technical Document Style 23  Ԁ   .. X)$&21Technical Document Style 23  Ԁ   .. X83&22Technical Document Style  23  Ԁ     .. X/&23Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ. X/&24Technical Document Style.. 23  Ԁ.   CRight ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersI.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)3|x<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXx6X@JQX@( T$   d^!z$(G.2Q$ FT!   tXX     0  MARVINBERKELESLIEMcWILLIAMS($   0  DUNBARRAMBOGarnettSykesKincaidLyerlaWhittemore&@FZ 8CaslonOpnface BT Regular("$    GGGG'dxd DU)UUDӀӀӀ2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23  ]^_`abcd ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Courier New% Line 7 dnnnn7Border 1ddQoC << G<  9p`(Arial  F!  #d#m  qq   YYY FILEDqX December18,1996CecilCrowson,Jr.qAppellateCourtClerk  \\RA'\  F!#d#m  qq   YYY FILEDqX December18,1996CecilCrowson,Jr.qAppellateCourtClerk   F!#d#m  qq   YYY FILEDqX December18,1996CecilCrowson,Jr.qAppellateCourtClerk PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva QC<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd F! . m    7ϙXXdd7\RA'\ `    , 5  n u` RproA1-j|`  `@Rߛ @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ EASTERNSECTIONWANDAGARNETTMARKHAM@ ) WASHINGTONCOUNTY@ ) 03A019603CV00083 PlaintiffAppellant @ )0 @ )@ ) v.@ ) HON.G.RICHARDJOHNSON@ ) CHANCELLOR @ )  (SittingbyStandingOrderCITYOFJOHNSONCITY,@ ) ofDesignation)d/b/aJOHNSONCITYTRANSIT@ )  @ ) AFFIRMEDASMODIFIED DefendantAppellee@ ) andREMANDED@   @  HOWARDR.DUNBAROFJOHNSONCITYFORAPPELLANTJOHNRAMBOOFJOHNSONCITYFORAPPELLEE@ OPINION         Goddard,P.J.  ThisisanonjurycasewhereinWandaGarnettMarkhamappealsajudgmentrenderedinherfavoragainstCityofJohnsonCity,d/b/aJohnsonCityTransit,intheamountof$3000.  Sheinsiststheevidencepreponderatesinfavorofalargeraward,andataminimumthestipulatedmedicalexpensesof$6396.20.ShealsoinsiststhattheTrialCourtwasinerrorindisregardingtheopinionsexpressedinthedepositionofherphysician,Dr.TedSykes,uponthegroundtheDoctor'stestimonywasnotbasedupona"reasonablemedicalcertainty,"andevenifitwereappropriatetoexcludeDr.Sykes'testimonyforthatreason,theCityhadwaivedanyobjectionbynotregisteringitatthetimethedepositionwastaken.  ItappearsfromthetranscriptthatMs.Markhamwasstruckbyabusbeingoperatedbyatransitemployee,TrudyHodges,asshemovedthebusforwardfromastoppedpositionwhileMs.Markhamwascrossinginfrontofit.  Theevidenceissharplydisputedastotheforceoftheimpact,aswellastotheinjuriesreceivedbyMs.Markham.TheTrialCourt,however,foundthatthenegligenceofthebusdriverwas100%and,asalreadynoted,grantedajudgmentintheamountof$3000.  ExcludingtheopinionsofDr.Sykes,asdidtheTrialCourt,wefinduponourdenovoreviewthattheevidencedoesnotpreponderateinfavorofanawardlargerthan$3000,unless,ascounselforMs.Markhamargues,theCitystipulatedmedicalexpensesinexcessofthatamount.  Theproofastothestipulationisasfollows:        MR.DUNBAR:MayitpleasetheCourt,shouldweinformtheCourtofthestipulationsthatwe've... THECOURT:Sure. MR.DUNBAR:...agreedupon? THECOURT:Sure. Mr.DUNBAR:Theaccidentreportandtheemergencyroomreportandthemedicalbills.MayIapproachtheBench,themedicalbills,theemergencyroomreportandthepolicereport.         Whereupon,counselfortheCityacquiescedbymakingnoobjectionandadvisedtheTrialCourtofcertainotherstipulations.    ThevalidityofMs.Markham'scontentionrelativetothestipulationdependsuponwhetherthepartiesintendedtostipulatethe$6396.20incurredasmedicalexpenseswerereasonableandnecessary,andalsoresultedfromtheinjuriesshereceivedintheaccident.Aswillbenotedabove,thestipulationissilentastobothpoints.  Weconcludebothintentionsmaybeinferredfromthestipulation.Itwouldberareindeedforcounseltostipulatematterswhichareincompetent,viz.,medicalexpensesneitherreasonableandnecessary,norresultingfromtheinjuriesMs.Markhamreceivedintheaccident.ItseemstousthatitwasincumbentuponcounselfortheCitytomakeitcleartotheTrialCourtthathewasstipulatingthatthesemedicalexpenseswereincurredbyMs.Markham,butnotthattheywerereasonableandnecessary,norasaresultoftheinjuriesreceivedintheaccident.  Inlightoftheforegoing,wefindthatcounselfortheCitystipulatedthemedicalexpensesincidenttoMs.Markham'sinjurytobethesumof$6396.20andincreasetheawardtothatamount.  Aproposofthethirdissue,asalreadynoted,theTrialCourtdisregardedanyopinionofDr.Sykes,andindoingsostatedthefollowing:        THECOURT:Well,theCourtfindsthattheopinionsofDr.Sykeswerenotbasedonreasonablemedicalcertainty,thereforetheCourtwilldisregardallopinionsexpressedbyDr.Sykesinhisdeposition.         Ms.MarkhaminsiststheTrialCourtwasinerrorbecausethestandardtobeappliedtotheadmissibilityofthedoctor'stestimonyisnotreasonablemedicalcertainty,butmoreprobablethannot,andalsothatnoobjectionwasregisteredatthetimethedepositionwastaken.  WedonotdeemitnecessarytoresolveeitherinsistencebyMs.Markhambecauseourreviewoftherecordpersuadesusthatevenusingthemoreprobablethannotstandard,Dr.SykesneverfoundacausalrelationbetweentheaccidentandtheinjuriesclaimedbyMs.Markham,anecessaryelementtopredicateajudgmentfordamages.  FortheforegoingreasonsthejudgmentoftheTrialCourtasmodifiedisaffirmedandthecauseremandedtotheCircuitCourtforWashingtonCountyforcollectionofthejudgmentandcostsbelow.CostsofappealareadjudgedonehalfagainstMs.MarkhamandonehalfagainsttheCityofJohnsonCity.      ______________________________      HoustonM.Goddard,P.J.CONCUR:̜(SeparateConcurringOpinion)HerschelP.Franks,J.(SeparateOpinionConcurringinPartandDissentinginPart)CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,J.̛       s7ϙXXdXXd7р@ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE̜Jpt;+'b|`  `@Jߛ@ EASTERNSECTION WANDAGARNETTMARKHAM,  )C/ANO.03A019603CV00083      ) PlaintiffAppellant, )WASHINGTONCOUNTY      )v.      )      )CITYOFJOHNSONCITY,  )d/b/aJOHNSONCITYTRANSIT, )      ) DefendantAppellee.  )@ CONCURRINGOPINION @   IconcurwithJudgeGoddardonallissues.However,IϜwouldaddthatstipulationsareencouragedtosaveexpenseandtimeofthepartiesandthecourts.Moreover,stipulationsshouldbeconstruedinviewoftheissuesinvolvedinthepleadings.Brownv.McCulloch,etal.,24Tenn.App.342,144S.W.2d1(1940).Stipulationsshouldreceiveafairandliberalconstructionwithalltheinferencesthatmaybelegitimatelydrawnfromthem,and inallcasesofdoubtthatconstructionshouldbeadoptedwhichisfavorabletothepartyinwhosefavoritismade .Stillv.EquitableLifeAssuranceSociety,165Tenn.224,237(1932).  PublicpolicyofthisStateencouragesstipulationofmedicalbillsinpersonalinjurycases.TheLegislaturehasestablishedthepresumptionthatmedical,doctorandhospitalbillsarereasonableandnecessaryifthestatutoryproceduresarefollowedandnoobjectionismade.T.C.A.245113.Ifthedefendanthadintendedtolimitthestipulationonmedicalexpenses,thenithadanobligationtoobjectorclarifythestipulationatthetimeitwasentered.             ________________________      HerschelP.Franks,J.7ϙXXdXXd7ќJpu;+'b|`  `@J̛@ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEWANDAGARNETTMARKHAM,  )C/ANO.03A019603CV00083      )WASHINGTONCOUNTYLAWCOURT  PlaintiffAppellant,)      )      )      )v.      )      )      )      )      )CITYOFJOHNSONCITY,  )d/b/aJOHNSONCITYTRANSIT, )      )HONORABLEG.RICHARDJOHNSON,  DefendantAppellee. )CHANCELLOR,BydesignationPP @ POPINIONCONCURRINGINPART@ ANDDISSENTINGINPARTPXԛ  mIconcurinpartanddissentinpart.  Idissentfromsomuchofthemajorityopinionasholdsthatthestipulationintherecordbeforeusembodiesthepartiesagreementthatthe agreeduponmedicalbillswereincurredasaproximateresultoftheaccident.Astotheissueofproximatecause,Idonotbelievethecolloquycitedinthemajorityopinionmeetsthedefinitionofastipulation:Ӝ̛ 8 Astipulationisanagreementbythepartiesonacertainmatter.Itofteninvolvesanagreementthatspecificfactsareundisputedandaretobeconsideredasproved.̛̜ӜCohen,SheppeardandPaine,TennesseeLawofEvidence201.8(3rd.ed.1995).  Aspertinenttothisappeal,thepartoftherecordquotedinthemajorityopinionshowsthattheparties agreeduponthemedicalbills.Themajoritysays,ineffect,thatthisexchangebetweenplaintiffscounselandthecourt,withnoϜverbalizationfromcounselforthedefendant,isastipulationtothefollowing:(1)thattheplaintiffincurredcertainmedicalbillsfromcertainhealthprovidersinspecifiedϜamounts;(2)thatthechargeswerebothreasonableandnecessarytotreatagivenconditionorinjury;and(3)thattheconditionorinjuryforwhichtheplaintiffwastreatedandforwhichthebillswererenderedwasproximatelycausedbytheaccident.Idonotfindallofthisinthequotedexchange.  IagreethatitisreasonabletoconstruetheimprecisestipulationtoincludethefirsttwoelementsϜmentionedabove.Furthermore,astothoseelements,IagreeϜthatcounselssilenceconstituteshisclientsconcessionthatthejurycanconsidertheseelementsasconclusivelyproven.However,Icannotstretchtheannouncedstipulationtoincludeproximatecause.Inmyjudgment,thedefendantinthiscasedidnotagreethattheconditionorinjuryforwhichplaintiffwastreatedandforwhichthebillswererenderedwasproximatelycausedbytheaccident.Theplaintiffdidnotexpresslyincludethisthirdelementwhenheannouncedthestipulation,andIdonotbelievecausationcanbereasonablyinferredfromtheimprecisestatementmadetothetrialcourt.Thisiscriticalinthiscasebecausethereisnoexperttestimonyrelatingthesebillstotheaccident.  Themajoritystates,insupportofitspositioninthismatter,that [i]twouldberareindeedforcounseltostipulatematterswhichareincompetent.Iagree;butIbelievethestipulationisastocompetentmattersevenifitonlyencompassesthefirsttwoofthesethreeelements.Thisisbecausetheseelementsaretwoofaseriesofcompetentmattersina chainoffactsnecessarytoshowliabilityformedicalexpensesinthetypicalpersonalinjurycase.  Since,inthiscase,itwastheplaintiff,andnotthedefendant,whohadtheburdenofproof,itwasincumbentuponϜhertomakesurethatagivenelementofherclaimwasclearlyembodiedinthestipulation.Idonotbelievethatthedefendanthadanyresponsibilityotherthantoagreeordisagreewiththestipulationasframedbytheplaintiff.If,asformulatedbytheplaintiff,thestipulationwasnotprecise,theplaintiffmustsuffertheconsequencesofthatlackofprecision.Inthiscase,Ibelieve,aspreviouslyindicated,thatthedefendantagreedtothe barebonesstipulationasstatedbytheplaintiffsattorney,andnothingmore.Inmyopinion,thatstipulationdoesnotincludeaconcessionastoproximatecause.̛  IagreewiththemajoritysobservationthatDr.ϜSykestestimonywasproperlydisregardedbythetrialcourt,notforthereasongivenbythelowercourt,butbecausehistestimonydidnotpurporttoshowacausalconnectionbetweentheaccidentandtheinjuriesclaimedbytheplaintiff,andthisnexuswasnotestablishedbyanyotherexperttestimony.  Iwouldaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourt.      __________________________________̜CharlesD.Susano,Jr.,J.