ÿWPCv 1# ¾UDÉ %  0( 0”;4Ïãòw@ú 0D: 0J~ 0TÈ 0^ 0hz 0râ 0|T 0†Ð 0V 1uæ 0d[ 0@¿ D3ÿ B)2 DC[ AMž Bë U* 2 AQ: Æ‹ 0DQ 0D• D/Ù Bv~%vÓ£˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nL(Î8§ÖhZŠ,Century-WP RegularX($¡¡(D(2´¤$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó§aö"3|x îïðDñòóôÓ€(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò&&&&'ÿÿdxd% Line 7 d####7Border 1dd* $Cþÿ << Gÿÿ d< Œ 9p`(Arial þÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ+"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€'ÔÔ€'ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€'XÔÌÌò òSeptember€08,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€'ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó*+ ,-Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó..'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  Ý›Ò  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑœÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àWESTERN€SECTION€AT€JACKSONÌ______________________________________________________________________________ÌÌEILEEN€œSMITH,›à àà àà àà àà àShelby€Chancery€No.€10615„1Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àC.A.€No.€02A01„9701„CH„00024Ìœ›à àPlaintiff,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àHon.€Neal€Small,€Judge̜ـ*ÙßR€%($A1-j|<û` Å `€€@ÿRß›v.à àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌSHELBY€COUNTY€GOVERNMENT,ÌÌà àDefendant.ÌÌDAVID€A.€E.€LUMB,€Memphis,€Attorney€for€Plaintiff.ÌÌCARROLL€C.€JOHNSON,€Memphis,€Attorney€for€Defendant.ÌÌò òòòAFFIRMEDó óóóÌÌOpinion€filed:Ì______________________________________________________________________________ÌÌò òTOMLIN,€Sr.€J.ó óà@ àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÓÓÔ€Ôà àEileen€Smith€(hereafter€ð ðPlaintiffðð)€filed€suit€against€Shelby€CountyÏGovernment€(hereafter€ð ðDefendantðð)€in€the€Chancery€Court€of€ShelbyÏCounty€seeking€to€recover€benefits€œfor›€an€injury€she€sustained€œwhileÏemployed›€by€the€Shelby€County€Health€Care€Center,€a€division€of€Defendant.€ÏFollowing€a€bench€trial€the€chancellor€found€that€Plaintiff€had€sustainedÏan€injury€that€arose€out€of€and€in€the€course€of€her€employment€andÍawarded€her€60%€disability€to€her€right€arm,€along€with€additionalÏcompensation€for€discretionary€costs€and€attorney€fees.€€Defendant€hasÏpresented€two€issues€on€appeal:€Whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€1)€findingÏthat€Plaintiff€sustained€a€compensable€injury€that€arose€in€the€course€ofÏher€employment;€and€2)€in€awarding€Plaintiff€a€permanent€vocationalÏdisability€rating€of€60%€to€the€right€arm.€€For€the€reasons€hereinafterÏstated,€we€find€no€error€and€affirm.Ìà àThe€basic€facts€are€not€in€dispute.€€Plaintiff,€who€had€a€bachelorððsÏdegree€in€social€work€and€twenty€years€experience€in€that€field,€was€œanÏemployee›€œof›€œDefendant›€when€she€was€œinjured.›€€Plaintiff€testified€that€theÏinjury€occurred€when€she€was€assisting€a€resident€patient€of€the€center€inÏremoving€one€of€several€articles€of€clothing.€€During€the€course€of€thisÏoperation€the€patient€œmoved›€her€œbody,›€causing€a€jerking€force€on€her€arm.€ÏPlaintiff€noticed€œthat›€her€wrist€was€swelling€and€reported€the€injury€toÏher€supervisor.€€Shortly€thereafter,€Defendantððs€in„house€physicianÏexamined€Plaintiffððs€hand€and€advised€œher›€to€report€to€the€emergencyÏœroom,›€where€x„rays€were€taken.€€At€that€time€her€hand€was€placed€in€aÏsplint,€her€arm€placed€in€a€sling€and€she€was€given€medication€for€pain.€ÏShe€was€advised€not€to€return€to€work€immediately.€€Ìà àPlaintiff€continued€to€suffer€pain€and€cramping€in€her€wrist.€€SheÏstated€that€her€position€as€a€social€worker€required€extensive€writing.€ÍHer€inability€to€continue€to€write€without€pain€posed€a€seriousÏimpediment€to€her€performing€her€job€effectively.€€Plaintiff€continued€toÏattempt€to€do€her€job,€including€writing€left„handed€and€typing€her€notes.€ÏBoth€of€these€were€deemed€unacceptable€by€her€supervisor.€€She€continuedÏto€work€until€December€œ1994,›€at€which€time€she€remained€absent€fromÏwork€because€of€her€injury€until€March€1995.Ìà àAfter€extensive€attempts€œat›€rehabilitation,€Plaintiff€was€sent€to€Dr.ÏE.€B.€Wilkerson,€Jr.,€an€orthopedic€œsurgeon,›€for€examination€and€Ñ7€Í]XXdðXXdð7Ñtreatment.€ÏœAfter›€examining€Plaintiff€and€œperforming›€an€arthrogram€on€œher›€wrist,Ïwhich€revealed€an€extensive€tear€in€the€fibrocartilage€of€Plaintiffððs€rightÏwrist,€Dr.€Wilkerson€performed€surgery€in€an€attempt€to€repair€theÏdamaged€fibrocartilage.€€Following€surgery,€Dr.€Wilkerson€testified€thatÏthe€nature€of€the€injury€was€not€consistent€with€the€description€of€theÏway€that€Plaintiff€said€she€was€hurt€and€voiced€the€opinion€that€aÏdegenerative€condition€in€the€structure€of€her€cartilage€was€the€problemÏrather€than€the€injury.€€After€performing€numerous€tests€and€range€ofÏmotion€studies,€Dr.€Wilkerson€was€of€the€opinion€œthat›€Plaintiff€hadÏreached€maximum€medical€œimprovement,›€and€gave€her€a€permanentÏdisability€rating€of€14%€to€the€right€arm.€€At€that€time€he€released€herÏfrom€his€care.€€Ìà àIn€March€1996€after€releasing€Plaintiff€from€his€care,€Dr.€WilkersonÏcompleted€a€standardized€report€entitled€ð ðòòTennessee€Department€of€LaborÏDivision€of€Workerððs€Compensation€Standard€Form€Medical€Report€onÏInjuries.óóðð€€In€this€report€he€detailed€Plaintiffððs€injuries.€€œThe›€reportÏcontained€the€following€question:ÌÓÓà8 àÌÔ€Ôà8 àð ðConsidering€the€nature€of€Claimantððs€occupation€and€medicalÏhistory€along€with€diagnosis€and€treatment,€does€this€injuryÏmore€probably€than€not€arise€out€of€the€claimantððsÏemployment?ððÌÌÌÓÓDr.€Wilkerson€answered€ð ðyesðð€to€the€above€question.Ìà àAfter€continuing€to€experience€pain€in€her€right€wrist€DefendantððsÏœrisk›€œmanagement›€œdepartment›€sent€Plaintiff€to€Dr.€Neil€Aranov,€a€clinicalÏpsychologist,€to€determine€if€there€were€any€psychological€factorsÏresulting€from€her€work„related€injury€that€were€impairing€her€recoveryÏand€return€to€the€workforce.€€In€his€deposition€Dr.€Aranov€testified€thatÏPlaintiff€suffered€from€a€psychological€condition€referred€to€asÏð ðadjustment€disorder€with€associated€anxiety€with€depressionðð€whichÏwas€directly€caused€by€Plaintiffððs€work„related€injury.€€Dr.€AranovððsÏprescribed€treatment€plan€was€unsuccessful€and€after€three€separateÏvisits€with€Plaintiff€he€terminated€the€treatment.€€This€suit€ultimatelyÍfollowed.€€Ìà àWhile€Defendant€as€a€governmental€agency€is€not€covered€by€theÏTennessee€Workers€Compensation€Act,€it€does€have€a€policy€where€itÏcompensates€for€on„the„job€injuries,€using€the€Tennessee€WorkersÏCompensation€Act€as€a€guideline.€€Following€a€bench€trial€the€court€foundÏthat€Plaintiff€was€entitled€to€60%€disability€of€the€right€arm,€entitlingÏher€to€receive€weekly€payments€of€$257.00€for€120€weeks€amounting€toÏ$30,814.00,€along€with€discretionary€costs€of€$386.29€and€œapprovedÏattorney›€fees€œin€the€amount€of›€$6,172.80.€€This€appeal€followed.Ìà àOur€scope€of€review€is€òòde€novoóó€upon€the€record€in€the€trial€court.€€AllÏfindings€of€fact€by€the€trial€court€come€to€this€court€with€a€presumptionÏof€correctness,€and,€absent€an€error€of€law,€unless€we€find€that€theÏevidence€preponderates€against€these€findings€we€must€affirm.€€T.R.A.P.Ï13(d).Ìà àThe€first€issue€we€address€is€whether€or€not€the€trial€court€was€inÏerror€in€finding€that€Plaintiffððs€injury€occurred€in€the€course€and€scope€ofÏher€employment.€€The€record€does€reflect€that€the€deposition€testimony€ofÏDr.€Wilkerson€was€to€the€effect€that€the€pain€described€by€Plaintiff€cameÏfrom€an€area€of€her€œwrist›€that€would€not€have€resulted€from€an€injury€likeÏthe€one€that€she€received€and€that€following€the€surgery€he€was€of€theÍopinion€that€the€injury€resulted€from€a€degenerative€ð ðwear€and€tear.ððÌà àNotwithstanding€this€testimony,€the€record€œreveals›€that€Dr.ÏWilkerson€signed€at€least€five€different€reports€to€Defendant€stating€thatÏPlaintiffððs€injuries€arose€out€of€her€employment.€€Four€of€these€reportsÏwere€filed€by€Dr.€Wilkerson€after€he€had€performed€the€surgery€onÏPlaintiffððs€wrist.€€œWe›€already€noted€that€the€final€report€filed€by€Dr.ÏWilkerson€affirmed€that€Plaintiffððs€injury,€more€probably€than€not€aroseÏout€of€her€employment.Ìà àThere€is€ample€œlay›€testimony€by€Plaintiff€from€which€the€trial€courtÏcould€reasonably€infer€that€a€tear€of€the€fibrocartilage€of€her€right€wristÏwas€a€direct€result€of€Plaintiffððs€employment€by€Defendant.€€A€trial€courtÏmay€properly€predicate€œa›€workersðð€compensation€award€on€medicalÏtestimony€that€a€given€accident€ð ðcould€beðð€the€cause€of€œan›€œinjury,›€if€thereÏis€also€lay€testimony€from€which€it€may€reasonably€be€inferred€that€theÏincident€was€the€cause€of€the€injury.€€òòP€&€L€Construction€Co.,€Inc.€v.ÏLankfordóó,€559€S.W.2d€793€(Tenn.€1978).€€This€issue€is€without€œmerit.›Ìà àThe€second€and€final€œissue›€is€whether€the€trial€court€erred€inÏawarding€Plaintiff€a€permanent€vocational€disability€rating€of€60%€to€theÏright€arm.€€In€òòClark€v.€National€Union€Fire€Ins.óó,€774€S.W.2d€586,€589€(Tenn.Ï1989)€our€supreme€court€stated€that€in€order€to€determine€the€extent€ofÍvocational€disability€the€trial€court€must€consider€all€of€the€pertinentÏfactors,€including€job€skills,€education,€training,€duration€of€disability,Ïjob€opportunities,€in€addition€to€the€anatomical€disability€testified€to€byÏthe€medical€experts.€€òòClarkóó€at€598.€€Furthermore,€in€determining€theÏamount€of€vocational€disability€incurred€by€the€employee,€the€trial€courtÏshould€also€consider€the€œemployeeððs›€own€assessment€of€œher›€physicalÏcondition€and€resulting€disabilities.€€òòòòId.óóóó€€The€œemployeeððs›€testimony€isÏprobative€in€establishing€such€conditions€as€the€existence€of€pain,€itsÏlocation€and€the€œemployeeððs›€inability€to€work.€€òòòòId.óóóó€€In€addition€to€the€proofÏheretofore€considered,€we€note€that€Dr.€Aranov€testified€that€althoughÏthere€was€no€psychiatric€disability€present€in€Plaintiff,€she€was€ð ðnotÏmalingeringðð€and€that€she€suffered€from€an€adjustment€disorder€withÏassociated€depression€and€anxiety€directly€resulting€from€her€work„related€injury.€€Ìà àPlaintiff€testified€that€she€continued€to€suffer€pain€and€cramping€inÏher€right€hand€following€the€numerous€and€repeated€attempts€to€alleviateÏthese€problems.€€She€further€testified€that€her€disability€resulted€in€aÏreduction€in€her€ability€to€grip€objects€as€well€as€a€general€reduction€inÏthe€dexterity€of€her€right€hand.€€Her€training€and€employment€experienceÏhave€been€limited€to€the€area€of€social€work€for€the€past€twenty€years.€ÍThe€evidence€also€reflects€that€Plaintiff€subsequently€found€another€jobÏas€a€social€worker€following€six€months€of€unemployment€and€that€herÏpresent€employment€has€been€affected€by€her€disability€to€the€extent€thatÏit€requires€her€to€work€many€hours€more€per€week€to€perform€duties€thatÏshe€normally€would€complete€in€a€forty€hour€work€week.€€In€sum,€we€are€ofÏthe€opinion€that€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€findings€ofÏthe€trial€court€concerning€the€extent€of€her€permanent€disability.€€ThisÏissue€is€also€without€merit.Ìà àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€in€allÏrespects.€€Costs€in€this€cause€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€Defendant,€for€whichÏexecution€may€issue€if€necessary.€€ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à__________________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àTOMLIN,€SR.€J.ÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à__________________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àCRAWFORD,€P.€J.€W.S.€€€€€€€€(CONCURS)€ÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à__________________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àœHIGHERS,›€J.€à àà àà à(CONCURS)€€€€€