ÿWPC±# ö¸‹ î@on§lྱnI5¥ê£LMU2ä! ƒ›O ¦ÿp¥ÿU„´‰³:>«h» = ,1´JÐän*õ(ÊÒ;qã®ÑH†z²ê[². ŒacÕo¢TEŸÅƒ¢IvQ&„X^‘—"ž –AËþôܵê£05y£Øt[æ5Jv]QÇú-LN,rÈbZÑPòBC”.–°PÏÒ¥e»\”m=k(_5×s½`ÚH®Û³OŸ+av[Ã;§¨¬{àcÕÿŒj½jâ¬÷ÿ@+±”M0ÊÊíÛN%%  lñ<Ý•b\0_e05Íç‡ÇÖg›¼0kè"¯îTþ‹Ðì·öcCÛ÷¬•Dy³‡Î–.þåOZV¶XvYE4ûÓuù˜”yñ ¬lË)ÜÖœ¼iÖ{2­ù™ñí§Jm9ˆ.o«ï–>Éþ:ʕ۸åAfÄ7Ó¦mÔùºhø>ò 0"“µO _ FV+ÓF€³.%vq ]€>£9@nc³¥½uÓ¬èÄA7Qæ™o0áÊà|ôi€F$âÊãðÈ9¿ƒQë,ıwÏWÛæøß2«H˜œ_<üH‘¨K1áû«¦1ðJ¹öüSÓò‡XW·U: %< 0ˆB wXÊ 4"6LE 0¤‘T5 B‰ 0̦ 0DrUN¶UNR,Z AQ†×U:×U:KU:K…U:…ƿƅÆKÆ×U:ׯ 0D×× 0D D/__ BŽ D3«««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««««« 0¤ÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞÞ A‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚!‚! 0°", øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX(`zI$¡¡ÑTRY(3Ø'ÿ Letter3Ø'3Ø'ÿ Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÔ  ÔjPkPlPmPnPoPpPqÓ€{|}~Ó€‹yk&\O3|xC:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT(|37'$©©Ý ƒzI!ÝÑTRY3Ø'ÿ Letter3Ø' 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÔ  ÔÝ  Ýc:\office\wpwin\template\legal\11deny.wpt d(|(3 f$¤¤Ý ƒzI!ÝÑTRY3Ø'ÿ Letter3Ø' 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÔ  ÔÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular(¶ÍY Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular "Ý ƒ Ô$ÝÒ°ÒÒH°ÒÔ‡ ¼4ü¼XXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ‡ XlÙX¼¼4üÔThe€multiplier€statute,€T.C.A.€ðð€50„6„241,€was€not€referenced€by€the€Chancellor,€norÐ ° Ðby€the€parties€on€appeal. !`#%Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ öÝ ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€XlÉXXXÔÔ€kwXXlÉÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XlÉXkwÔÐ  ÐÌJuly€26,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular öÝ ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€XlÉXXXÔÔ€kwXXlÉÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XlÉXkwÔÐ  ÐÌJuly€26,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular öÝ ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€XlÉXXXÔÔ€kwXXlÉÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XlÉXkwÔÐ  ÐÌJuly€27,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular öÝ ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€XlÉXXXÔÔ€kwXXlÉÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XlÉXkwÔÐ  ÐÌJuly€26,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 öÝ ƒ!¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€XlÉXXXÔÔ€kwXXlÉÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XlÉXkwÔÐ  ÐÌJuly€27,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAhÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial RegularƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó'''÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd 'ÿÿdxd(|37'$££Ý ƒzI!ÝÑTRY3Ø'ÿ Letter3Ø' 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÔ  ÔÝ  Ý`yúÿ  <<= 8ÀÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ(ˆ3'Ò$««Ý ƒzI!ÝÑTRY3Ø'ÿ Letter3Ø' 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÔ  ÔÝ  ÝÔ d ÔÝ ƒzI!ÝÑTRY3Ø'ÿ Letter3Ø' 3Ø' Letterÿ3Ø'TÑÔ  ÔÝ  ÝÒ€°ÒÒ„°ÒÑ` °ÑÑTR[  AØ'ÿLegal ManualY3Ø'ÿ Letter AØ'ÿ Legal 3Ø' LetterTÑñ{ññqñßr€(<,(j 8` `€€@Eôa ` 8ttxP,` ð  rßñqññ{ññ{ññ{ñà@ó ó êàIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEˆÌñ{ññ{ñà@%%(êàAT€NASHVILLEˆÌñ{ññ{ñÌñ|ññ{ñßt€(>.*jx‚)` `€€@Ev; ` 8ttxP® ð ) tßñ{ññ|ññ|ññ|ñÌñ}ññ|ñßt€(>.*jx–«` `€€@EŠ£ ` 8ttxPÂø ð « tßñ|ññ}ññ~ññ}ñßt€(>.*jx–«` `€€@EŠ£ ` 8ttxPÂø ð « tßñ}ññ~ññ~ññ~ñÌñ~ññ~ñJOHN€O.€PEOPLES,à à àà 8 àà  à€)à è àBEDFORD€CHANCERY€NO.€à  # àÐ Þ ~ Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à€)à è à19750Ð Äd Ðñ~ñßt€(>.*jxP3` `€€@EDÝ` 8ttxP|ªð 3 tßñ~ñà Ø àPLAINTIFF/APPELLEE,à@ÉÉ.êà)ˆÐ ªJ Ðà Ø àà@ÉÉ.êà)ˆÌà@ÉÉ.êà)ˆà è àHon.€Tyrus€H.€Cobb,€ChancellorÐ v  Ðv.à@ÉÉ.êà)ˆÐ \ü  Ðà@ÉÉ.êà)ˆÌA€&€M€EXPRESS,€INC.€and€à@ÉÉ.êà)ˆÐ (È  ÐLUMBERMENððS€UNDERWRITINGà@ÉÉ.êà)ˆà è àS.€CT.€NO.€01S01„9801„CH„00007Ð ®  ÐALLIANCE,à@ÉÉ.êà)ˆÐ ô”  Ðà@ÉÉ.êà)ˆÌà Ø àDEFENDANTS/APPELLANTS.à@ÉÉ.êà)ˆà0 è àAFFIRMEDÐÀ`èT$èT$ ÐÌÌÌà@II*êàòòò òJUDGMENTó óóóˆà€T$T$MT$àˆÐ Xø ÐÌÌÓÓà Ø àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€motion€for€review€pursuant€to€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð50„6„225(e)(5)(B),€the€entire€record,€including€the€order€of€referral€toÏthe€Special€Workers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel,€and€the€Panel's€MemorandumÏOpinion€setting€forth€its€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law,€which€areÏincorporated€herein€by€reference;Ìà Ø àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€motion€for€review€is€not€wellÏtaken€and€should€be€denied;€and€Ìà Ø àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Panel's€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€ofÏlaw€are€adopted€and€affirmed,€and€the€decision€of€the€Panel€is€made€the€judgmentÏof€the€Court.Ìà Ø àCosts€will€be€paid€evenly€by€the€parties,€for€which€execution€may€issue€ifÏnecessary.Ìà Ø àIT€IS€SO€ORDERED.ÌÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àPER€CURIAMÌÌBARKER,€J.€NOT€PARTICIPATINGÐ  ;¢17 ЛÑ  ÑÔ‡X¬cXXXÔÑ7€lÉ»XdæXXdæ7Ñò òà@êàIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ `  ÐÓ  ÓSPECIAL€WORKERSðð€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELÌÓ*ÓÓÓà@â â êàAT€NASHVILLE,€DECEMBER€1998€SESSIONˆÌÌÌñ‹ñœßt€(>.*jxöÿå` `€€@Eê¹` 8ttxP"ñð È tß›ñ‹ñÌó óJOHN€O.€PEOPLES,à ˆ àà à àà 8 àœà  à)›à è àBEDFORD€CHANCERYÐ À` Ðñ‹ññ‹ñà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ìñqñœñqñà Ø àPlaintiff/Appelleeà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àÐ ˜8  Ðñ‹ññ‹ñà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àNO.€01S01„9801„CH„00007Ð „$  Ðv.à Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ð p  Ðñ‹ñßr€(<,(j 8` `€€@Eô_` 8ttxP,\ð  rßññœñññ‹ñà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)à è àÐ \ü  ÐA€&€M€EXPRESS,€INC.€andà à àà 8 àœà  à)›à è àHON.€œTYRUS›€H.€COBBÐ Hè  ÐLUMBERMENððS€UNDERWRITING€œà  à)›à è àCHANCELLORÐ 4Ô  ÐALLIANCE,à 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àœà  à)›Ð  À Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  à)Ìà Ø àDefendants/Appellantsà 8 àà  à)Ð ø˜ ÐÌÌò òòòFor€the€Appellant:à ˆ àà à àà 8 àœà  àà è àFor›€the€Appellee:Ð ¼\ ÐÌó óóóWilliam€L.€Abernathy,€Jr.à à àà 8 àœà  àñjñà è àñjñJohn›€H.€Norton,€IIIÐ ”4 МLeitner›,€Williams,€Dooleyà à àà 8 àœà  àñkñà è àñkñOne›€on€the€SquareÐ €  Ѐand€œNapolitan›,€œPLLC›à à àà 8 àà  àœñlñà è àñlñP.›€O.€Drawer€37Ð l  Ð2300€First€American€Centerà à àà 8 àœà  àñmñà è àñmñShelbyville›,€TN€37162Ð X!ø ÐNashville,€TN€37238„2300à à àà 8 àÐ D"ä Ðà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àœñnñà è àñnñThomas›€F.€BloomÌà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àœñoñà è àñoñ500›€Church€Street,€œ5th›€œFlr›.Ìà Ø àà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àœñpñà è àñpñNashville,›€TN€37219à ð àÐ %¨ ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌò òòòÓ  ÓM€E€M€O€R€A€N€D€U€M€€€O€P€I€N€I€O€NÐ |+"% ÐÌMembers€of€Panel:ÌÌó óóóJustice€William€M.€BarkerÐ ,/Ì%) ÐSenior€Judge€William€H.€InmanÌSpecial€Judge€Joe€C.€Loser,€Jr.ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓbÓÌMODIFIEDà 0 àà ˆ àà à àà 8 àà  àà è àINMAN,€Senior€JudgeÐ <:Ü05 ЇÓÓÓ  Óà Ø àÔ#†XlÉXXX¬cˆ #ÔÔ‡ XS”XXXlÉÔThis€workers'€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€Special€Workers'Ð `  ÐCompensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€in€accordance€with€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„¼6„225(e)(3)€for€hearing€and€reporting€to€the€Supreme€Court€of€findings€of€fact€and€conclusionsÏof€law.Ô#†XlÉXX XS”­#ÔÔ‡X¬cXXXlÉÔÐ   Ðà Ø àThe€plaintiff€is€46€years€old.€€He€has€an€eighth€grade€education,€with€no€specializedÏtraining.€€His€work€history€is€principally€that€of€a€truck€driver.€€On€September€12,€1994,€he€wasÏinjured€when€he€crashed€into€highway€equipment€near€Glasgow,€Kentucky,€and€he€filed€thisÏaction€on€January€24,€1995€seeking€workersðð€compensation€benefits€for€the€injuries€sustainedÏin€the€job„related€accident.Ìà Ø àThe€plaintiff€had€suffered€a€compensable€back€injury€in€1983€for€which€he€hadÏundergone€two€lumbar€laminectomies,€performed€by€Dr.€Ray€Hester,€a€Nashville€neurosurgeon,Ïin€1983€and€1984.€€His€claim€for€workersðð€compensation€benefits€was€settled€on€the€basis€ofÏa€40€percent€permanent,€partial€disability.Ìà Ø àHe€testified€at€the€trial€of€the€œcase›€which€is€the€subject€of€this€litigation,€that€he€had€fullyÏrecovered€from€all€effects€of€his€1983€accident,€and€he€does€not€claim€an€aggravation€of€aÏpreviously€existing€injury.Ìà Ø àImmediately€following€the€accident€of€September€12,€1994,€he€was€taken€to€a€hospitalÏin€œGlasgow,›€where€he€was€treated€and€released.€€He€had€sustained€no€fractures,€lacerations€orÏother€indicia€of€trauma.€€œHe›€returned€to€Tennessee€and€contacted€Anna€œClevenger›,€the€personÏin€charge€of€workersðð€compensation€matters€for€his€employer,€A€&€M€Express,€and€requestedÏpermission€to€see€Dr.€Hester€(œwho›€had€treated€him€for€the€1983€injuries).€€After€someÏequivocation,€the€plaintiff€was€informed€that€he€would€have€to€see€one€of€the€employerððsÏphysicians,€Dr.€Gary€Daniels.Ìà Ø àThe€claim€was€received€by€Lumbermenððs€on€September€15,€1994.€€Gloria€Wenk,€aÏSenior€Claims€Adjuster,€informed€the€plaintiff€that€he€would€have€to€see€approved€physicians,Ïâ âone€of€whom€was€Dr.€Daniels.€€Ð ˜78.2 Ðà Ø àThe€plaintiff€first€saw€Dr.€Daniels€that€day,€and€two€or€three€times€thereafter.€Ïâ âAccording€to€the€plaintiff,€Dr.€œDaniels›€performed€no€diagnostic€tests,€and€his€condition€did€notÏimprove.€€The€plaintiff€testified€that€prior€to€the€collision€he€was€pain€free€and€felt€normal€butÏafter€the€collision€he€continued€to€have€pain€andÏtingling€in€his€arm,€hands€and€legs€and€pain€in€his€neck€and€back.Ìà ` àWhen€Dr.€Danielsðð€medication€provided€no€relief,€the€plaintiff€called€eitherÏGloria€Wenk€at€Lumbermenððs€or€Anna€Clevenger€at€A&M€Express,€who€told€himÏthat€he€could€see€another€physician.€€Dr.€Daniels€thereupon€referred€him€to€Dr.€R.ÏManuel€Weiss,€a€board„certified€neurosurgeon€in€Nashville.Ìà ` àOn€September€23,€1994,€Nelda€Peoples,€plaintiffððs€wife,€called€Gloria€WenkÏto€say€that€Dr.€Daniels€had€referred€her€husband€to€Dr.€Weiss.€€She€asked€if€he€couldÏsee€Dr.€Ray€Hester,€who€had€performed€Mr..€Peoplesðð€previous€surgeries.€€Ms.ÏWenk€advised€Ms.€Peoples€that€Dr.€Daniels€had€made€the€September€28Ïappointment€with€Dr.€Weiss€and€that€although€she€would€inquire€if€Dr.€Hester€couldÏbe€one€of€the€three€approved€neurosurgeons,€she€did€not€believe€that€he€would€beÏapproved.Ìà ` àMs.€Wenk€testified€that€on€September€27,€1994,€she€called€Nelda€Peoples€andÏoffered€a€panel€of€three€neurosurgeons€(Drs.€Weiss,€Allen€and€McPherson).€€SheÏalso€told€Mrs.€Peoples€that€œMr.›€Peoples€could€keep€his€September€28€appointmentÏwith€Dr.€Weiss€and€then€decide€which€of€the€three€he€preferred.€€The€plaintiff€agreedÏthat€he€was€offered€a€choice€of€three€neurosurgeons,€Dr.€Weiss,€Dr.€Allen€and€Dr.Ïâ âMcPherson,€all€board„certified.€€Ð °730 Ðà ` àSignificantly,€on€September€27,€Ms.€Wenk€also€advised€Nelda€Peoples€thatÏâ âDr.€Hester€and€his€group,€Neurosurgical€Associates,€were€not€approved,€because€ofÏbad€experiences€with€Neurosurgical€Associates,€which€had€too€œmany€unsuccessful›Ïsurgeries€and€procedures.Ìà ` àOn€September€27€and€September€29,€1994,€the€plaintiff€saw€Dr.€Weiss,€withÏcomplaints€of€pain€in€his€arms,€legs,€neck€and€chest.€€Dr.€Weiss€noted€complaints€ofÏtingling€fingers€and€a€weak€grip,€left€more€than€right,€but€found€no€evidence€ofÏobjective€neurologic€œdisease›€and€no€evidence€of€a€neurologic€syndrome.€€There€wereÏno€symptoms€suggestive€of€a€disc€rupture€or€some€other€form€of€a€neuralÏimpingement.Ìà ` àDr.€Weiss€described€a€litany€of€wide„ranging€complaints€which€he€said€wereÏso€disseminated,€diffuse,€vague€and€ill„defined€that€he€did€not€suspect€a€surgicallyÏremedial€lesion.€€œBecause€the›€plaintiff€said€he€had€total€body€pain€radiating€in€allÏœdirections,›€€Dr.€Weiss€œbelieved›€that,€even€if€œMr.›€Peoples€œhad›€a€herniated€disc,Ïsurgery€would€not€be€an€effective€treatment€for€him.€€He€testified€that€people€withÏsymptoms€to€that€extent€generally€have€œmusculo›„ligamentous€phenomena€in€theÏabsence€of€fractures€or€dislocations€or€some€other€structural€substrate€and€are€bestÏleft€alone€without€œsurgery,›€perhaps€doing€a€regular€exercise€program€or€using€overÏthe€counter€anti„inflammatory€agents.€€In€his€judgment,€the€plaintiff€was€not€aÏcandidate€for€surgery.Ìà ` àThe€plaintiff€was€irate€with€Dr.€Weiss€about€his€medical€advice.€€After€seeingÏDr.€Weiss€only€twice,€the€plaintiff€believed€that€he€was€ð ðgetting€the€run„aroundððÏfrom€Lumbermenððs,€and€thereupon€contacted€Dr.€William€R.€Schooley,€an€associateÏof€Dr.€Hester.Ìà ` àOn€September€30,€Lumbermenððs€offered€another€choice€of€neurosurgeonsÏfrom€the€original€panel.€€The€plaintiff€again€asked€to€see€Dr.€Hester,€and€GloriaÐ Ð9 52 ÐWenk€again€denied€that€request.€€After€being€denied€Dr.€Hester,€the€plaintiff€choseÏDr.€McPherson,€an€approved€board„certified€neurosurgeon.Ìà ` àOn€October€3,€1994,€plaintiffððs€counsel€contacted€Gloria€Wenk€to€ask€whetherÏhis€client€could€see€Dr.€Ray€Hester€instead€of€the€panel€doctors.€€Ms.€Wenk€told€himÏthat€she€could€not€allow€the€plaintiff€to€see€Dr.€Hester,€and€that€the€plaintiffððsÏappointment€with€Dr.€McPherson€should€be€kept.Ìà ` àBy€this€time,€either€the€plaintiff,€his€or€his€counsel€had€been€told€five€(5)€timesÏthat€Dr.€Hester€and€his€group€were€not€authorized€to€treat€Mr..€Peoples.Ìà ` àNevertheless,€on€October€4€and€again€on€October€11,€1994,€the€plaintiff€sawÏDr.€Schooley,€a€member€of€Dr.€Hesterððs€group,€Neurosurgical€Associates.€€Ìà ` àœParenthetically,›€Gloria€Wenk€testified€that,€if€the€plaintiff€had€exhausted€theÏpanel€or€was€dissatisfied€with€the€panel,€œLumbermenððs›€was€prepared€to€offer€aÏfourth€neurosurgeon,€œviz.,€›€Dr.€Harold€Smith,€Dr.€Cushman€or€Dr.€œZellen,€but›€€œthe›Ïplaintiff€or€his€wife€or€attorney€always€œrequested›€Dr.€Hester€or€ð ðhis€partnerðð€(Dr.ÏSchooley)€by€name.à h àÐ p"À Ðà ` àœOn›€October€24,€the€plaintiff€saw€Dr.€McPherson,€who€noted€pain€in€the€lowÏback€and€both€hips,€some€pain€in€the€right€leg€and€some€neck€pain,€and€no€persistentÏweakness.€€The€CT€scan€of€the€cervical€spine€showed€some€degeneration€but€nothingÏthat€œappeared€to€pinch›€a€nerve.Ìà ` àThe€plaintiff€was€scheduled€to€see€Dr.€McPherson€again€on€November€7,Ï1994.€€Before€this€visit,€he€œobtained›€his€imaging€studies€from€Dr.€Schooleyððs€œoffice,›€Ïœwhose›€records€note€that€on€November€7,€1994,€ð ðpatient€had€to€pick€up€films€and€goÏfor€SO€(second€opinion)€with€workmenððs€comp€œdr›.€[sic]€òòbut€wants€only€Dr.€HesterÐ p3À., Ðfor€a€doctor.ððÌà ` àóóUpon€seeing€Dr.€McPherson€again€on€November€7,€1994,€the€plaintiffÐ °730 Ðdescribed€some€ð ðpressureðð€in€his€neck€but€had€good€range€of€motion€in€his€neck.€€HeÐ Ð9 52 Ðdescribed€no€arm€pain.€€He€felt€some€numbness€in€his€arms€and€some€pain€betweenÏhis€shoulder€blades.€€He€also€complained€of€tingling€in€both€feet€and€low€back€andÏright€leg€pain.€€Both€straight€leg€raising€test€and€MRI€confirmed€no€nerve€rootÏentrapment€in€the€lumbar€spine.€€According€to€Dr.€McPherson,€muscular€soft„tissueÏpain,€likely€caused€by€the€accident,€was€the€source€of€discomfort€in€the€low€back.€ÏHe€advised€the€plaintiff€to€exercise,€but€the€advice€was€ignored€or€unacceptable.Ìà ` àBy€both€history€and€physical€examination,€according€to€Dr.€McPherson,€thereÏwas€no€evidence€of€any€nerve€root€entrapment€of€the€cervical€spine.€€The€plaintiffÏhad€no€arm€pain€with€the€motions€expected€if€he€had€cervical€nerve€root€entrapment,Ïand€Dr.€McPherson€believed€that,€if€the€accident€had€caused€a€cervical€disc€toÏherniate€or€bulge,€it€would€have€become€symptomatic€œwithin›€five€or€six€weeks€afterÏthe€accident.Ìà ` àFor€further€study,€Dr.€McPherson€referred€the€plaintiff€to€Dr.€Rubinowicz,€aÏneurologist€certified€by€the€American€Academy€of€Psychiatry€and€Neurology€withÏtwelve€yearsðð€experience.€€Ìà ` àOn€November€16,€1994,€Dr.€Rubinowicz€examined€the€plaintiff,€who€gave€aÏhistory€of€bilateral€burning€hip€discomfort€and€right€leg€tingling,€intermittent€footÏnumbness€associated€with€shooting€pain€in€both€lower€extremities€which€was€greaterÏon€the€right€side.€€He€also€described€mid„back€pain€which€occasionally€radiated€intoÏhis€hands€and€arms€and€was€associated€with€numbness.€€His€wife€also€told€Dr.ÏRubinowicz€of€the€plaintiffððs€frequently€dropping€things.Ìà ` àDr.€Rubinowiczðð€examination,€which€included€the€neck,€revealed€no€motorÏdeficits€in€his€arms€or€legs.€€Sensory€testing€revealed€no€focal€areas€of€abnormality,Ïand€his€reflexes€were€sound.€€Straight€leg€raising€was€negative,€and€there€was€onlyÏâ âa€mild€decrease€in€range€of€motion€of€the€neck.Ð °730 Ðà ` àThe€plaintiff€testified€that€Dr.€Rubinowicz€was€the€only€one€of€the€threeÏâ âcompany€doctors€who€really€had€an€accurate€idea,€who€was€ð ðclued€inðð€with€whatÏwas€going€on€with€his€neck,€back€and€arms.€€but€Dr.€Rubinowicz€found€no€objectiveÏsigns€of€nerve€root€entrapment€of€the€cervical€spine€and€focused€on€the€lumbar€spineÏbecause€ð ðthat€is€where€he€described€most€of€his€symptoms€being€a€problem.ðð€€HeÏbelieved€that€the€plaintiff€had€symptoms€òòconsistent€with€a€muscular€strain.óó€€Dr.Ð P   ÐRubinowicz€saw€no€reason€to€evaluate€the€cervical€spine,€because€the€only€suggestedÏarea€of€nerve€entrapment€was€to€the€lumbar€spine.€€He€thereupon€ordered€œEMG›Ïnerve€conduction€studies€for€both€legs.€€Those€tests€were€performed€on€NovemberÏ23,€1994€and€revealed€no€focal€abnormalities€and€no€evidence€for€nerve€or€muscleÏdisease.€€He€found€no€evidence€of€nerve€entrapment€syndrome€or€a€peripheralÏneuropathy€of€the€lumbar€spine€and€felt€that€conservative€treatment€should€beÏcontinued.Ìà ` àDr.€Rubinowicz€opined€that€a€bulging€disk€can€be€treated€conservatively€byÏmedication,€therapy,€exercise,€or€splints€or€braces.€€In€the€event€of€a€bulging€diskÏwith€no€other€evidence€of€focal€neurologic€findings€and€a€normal€EMG,€he€wouldÏanticipate€some€improvement€in€a€three€to€six€month€period.€€By€the€time€theÏplaintiff€saw€Dr.€Rubinowicz,€he€was€only€two€and€one„half€months€post„accident.Ìà ` àIf€an€MRI€revealed€a€bulging€disc€but€there€was€some€question€of€nerveÏimpingement,€an€accepted€course€would€be€to€perform€another€diagnostic€study€toÏrule€in€or€rule€out€nerve€entrapment,€and€that€study€would€be€an€EMG.€€He€testifiedÏthat€an€osteophyte,€or€bone€spur,€can€cause€nerve€entrapment€or€impingement.Ìà ` àAfter€seeing€Dr.€Rubinowicz,€the€plaintiff€never€again€asked€for€anotherÏdoctor€from€the€panel€of€neurosurgeons.€€Instead,€he€made€an€appointment€to€see€Dr.Ïâ âHester.Ð °730 Ðà ` àOn€December€1,€1994,€the€plaintiff€saw€Dr.€Ray€Hester,€who€noted€pain€in€theÏâ âneck€and€low€back,€and€numbness€in€both€hands,€mainly€when€lying€down,€withÏpain€in€both€legs€at€times,€with€right€a€little€worse€then€the€left.Ìà ` àAccording€to€his€notes,€Dr.€Hester€felt€that€Mr..€Peoples€had€a€ð ðsignificantÏcervical€and€lumbar€strain€that€is€slowly€improving€[and€.€.€.]€would€continue€òòtoÐ 0 € Ðslowly€improve€with€time.ðð€€He€felt€that€Mr..€Peoples€needed€to€do€some€therapy,Ïparticularly€at€home,€and€that€it€would€be€another€two€or€three€months€before€heÏrecovered€sufficiently€to€return€to€work€with€some€restrictions.Ìà ` àóóOn€December€22,€1994,€the€plaintiff€returned€to€Neurosurgical€Associates€butÐ ° Ðsaw€òòDr.€Schooley€óóinstead€of€Dr.€Hester,€possibly€because€Dr.€Schooley€was€a€ððnewððÐ Ð  Ðphysician€and€did€ððnot€have€as€many€patients€as€Dr.€Hester.ðð€€He€was€aware€of€Dr.ÏHesterððs€opinion.Ìà ` àDr.€Schooley€ordered€an€MRI,€which€he€said€showed€a€ð ðmoderate€degree€ofÏencroachment€on€the€left€neural€foramen€at€C6„7"€and€the€ð ðC7„T1€levelÏdemonstrates€what€appears€to€be€a€mild€degree€of€lateral€disc€bulge€possiblyÏrepresenting€early€herniation€intruding€on€the€left€lateral€recess€and€neural€foramen.ðð€ÏDr.€Schooley€interpreted€that€study€to€show€a€disc€at€C6„7€that€was€herniated€orÏbulging€enough€to€push€on€the€nerve€root€to€give€him€pain.€€He€opined€that€the€onlyÏanatomic€change€was€the€C6„7€disc€which€moved€from€its€normal€position€andÏpushed€on€the€nerve€as€it€exited€the€foramen,€but€he€conceded€that€òònever€was€thereÐ -`(& Ða€herniated€disc,óó€just€a€bulging€one.€€He€also€thought€that€an€osteophyte€at€C6„7Ð 0/€*( Ðcould€cause€symptoms,€and€that€the€osteophytes€predated€the€accident.€€He€felt€thatÏthe€radiculopathy€was€caused€by€a€mixture€of€the€bulging€disc€and€foraminalÏstenosis€at€C6„7.€€Ìà ` àBecause€of€the€MRI€and€the€plaintiffððs€complaints€of€pain,€òòandÐ °730 Ðnotwithstanding€there€were€no€objective€signs€of€herniation€noted€by€the€MRIÐ Ð9 52 Ðradiologist€or€any€prior€treating€or€consulting€physician,óó€Dr.€Schooley€performedÐ ° Ðòòthe€first€of€three€surgeries,óó€an€anterior€cervical€œdiskectomy›€and€fusion.Ð Ð  Ðà ` àUpon€learning€from€the€employer€of€the€scheduled€surgery,€Gloria€WenkÏcalled€the€plaintiffððs€counsel€on€December€30,€1994€to€advise€him€that€the€surgeryÏwas€not€authorized€and€would€not€be€paid€by€Lumbermenððs.€€Counsel€told€Ms.ÏWenk€that€Dr.€Rubinowiczðð€opinion€was€all€right,€but€those€of€the€other€two€panelÏdoctors€were€not€and€that€òòð ðthis€is€an€issue€weððll€obviously€deal€with€in€litigation.ððÐ pÀ  Ðà ` àóóThe€first€surgery€gave€only€temporary€relief.€€After€a€month€or€so,€the€painÐ à Ðð ðjust€came€back,ðð€to€the€same€level€as€before€the€surgery,€with€no€apparent€cause.Ìà ` àDr.€Schooley€repeated€the€same€surgery€(anterior€cervical€diskectomy€andÏfusion)€at€the€same€level,€C6„7,€on€May€21,€1995,€ð ðto€take€out€a€little€more€boneððÏbecause€ð ðthe€relief€of€his€symptoms€was€insufficient€and€.€.€.€òòthese€osteophytes€.€.€.Ð ` Ðmight€be€causing€enough€trouble€that€it€was€worth€taking€them€out.ððÌà ` àóóThe€pain€ð ðjust€came€backðð€after€the€second€surgery.Ð P   Ðà ` àOn€September€15,€1995,€Dr.€Schooley€performed€aòò€third€óócervical€spineÐ p"À Ðsurgery,€a€œforaminotomy›€at€two€levels,€C6„7€and€C7„T1,€òòto€takeout€yet€more€bone.óó€Ð $à ÐOperative€notes€on€that€date€do€not€mention€the€removal€of€any€soft€œdiscal›Ïherniation.Ìà ` àThe€pain€returned€after€the€third€surgery.Ìà ` àDr.€Schooley€assigned€a€DRE€Category€III€impairment€of€15€percent€to€theÏwhole€body€for€the€plaintiffððs€cervical€spine€condition.€€According€to€Dr.€Schooley,Ïthe€Combined€Value€Table€of€the€òòAMA€Guides,€4th€Ed.óó€gives€a€36€percent€wholeÐ P1 ,* Ðbody€rating€when€combining€the€15€percent€new€impairment€with€the€pre„existingÏ25€percent€whole€body€medical€impairment.Ìœò òòòññÌññññÐ Ì952 Ðññ›à@..&ÌàThe€Medical€ProofˆÌó óóóà ` àDr.€M.€Robert€Weiss,€a€board„certified€neurological€surgeon,€testified€that€heÐ Ì Ðsaw€the€claimant€in€September,€1994,€on€a€referral€from€Dr.€Gary€Daniels.€€TheÏclaimant€had€no€fractures,€lacerations€or€other€signs€of€trauma,€but€was€having€neckÏand€back€pain,€radiating€to€his€right€leg.€€Examination€revealed€no€neurologicalÏdeficit.€€Claimant€walked€normally,€with€an€unrestricted€waist€range€of€motion.€€HeÏhad€no€muscle€spasm,€and€neck€range€of€motion€was€unrestricted.€€Reflexes€wereÏnormal.€€X„rays€had€previously€been€taken,€but€Dr.€Weiss€ordered€a€bone€scan€toÏensure€that€the€x„ray€films€had€missed€nothing.€€Dr.€Weiss€found€no€evidence€ofÏobjective€neurologic€disease€and€released€the€claimant€to€return€to€work.€€HeÏassessed€zero€percent€impairment.€€With€respect€to€a€herniated€disc,€Dr.€Weiss€wasÏof€the€opinion€that€the€likelihood€of€it€was€remove€based€on€his€clinical€tests€and€didÏnot€order€the€traditional€myelogram€or€MRI.Ìà ` àòòDr.€Warren€E.€McPhersonóó€is€a€board„certified€neurosurgeon.€€He€first€saw€theÐ L œ Ðclaimant€on€October€20,€1994,€who€had€a€history€of€two€lumbar€laminectomies€inÏ1983€and€1984.€€Dr.€McPherson€testified€that€the€claimant€complained€of€pain€in€hisÏlow€back€and€hips,€and€numbness€in€both€feet€together€with€neck€pain.€€An€MRIÏtaken€on€October€25,€1994€revealed€no€ruptured€disc.€€On€his€third€visit€to€Dr.ÏMcPherson,€no€pathology€could€be€found€to€explain€the€pain€the€plaintiffÏcomplained€of,€and€to€quote€Dr.€McPherson,ððI€was€wondering€about€whether€thereÏwas€anything€else€going€on.ððÌà ` àDr.€McPherson€then€referred€the€plaintiff€to€a€medical€neurologist,€Dr.ÏRubinowicz,€who€conducted€a€nerve€conduction€study€of€the€plaintiffððs€legs€andÏfound€them€normal.€€Dr.€McPherson€opined€that€the€plaintiff€had€ð ðsome€type€ofÏâ âmuscular€soft€tissue€pain.ðð€€He€opined€that€the€plaintiff,€if€he€was€trulyÐ ¬7ü20 Ðasymptomatic€before€the€accident,€would€ð ðget€another€2%ðð€based€on€his€subjectiveÏcomplaints.Ìâ âà ` àòòDr.€Richard€Rubinowiczóó€is€a€board„certified€neurologist.€€He€initially€saw€theÐ ð@ Ðclaimant€on€November€16,€1994,€for€purposes€of€evaluation.€€After€describing€theÏplaintiffððs€symptoms€and€complaints,€it€was€his€impression€that€the€symptoms€wereÏconsistent€with€a€muscular€strain.€€He€found€no€objective€signs€of€any€nerve€rootÏentrapment€of€the€cervical€spine.€€He€saw€the€claimant€again€on€November€23,€1994Ïand€performed€an€EMG€to€evaluate€his€legs.€€The€studies€revealed€no€nerve€orÏmuscle€disease€or€any€focal€abnormalities.€€He€testified€that€a€bulging€disc€and€aÏherniated€disc€were€entirely€different,€and€that€a€bulging€disc€can€be€treatedÏconservatively.€€He€was€not€questioned€about€impairment€and€expressed€no€opinion.Ìà ` àòòDr.€William€R.€Schooleyóó€is€a€neurosurgeon€who€is€not€board„certified.€€HeÐ ` Ðsaw€the€claimant€in€December€1994,€who€had€been€treated€conservatively€ð ðby€theÏtime€he€got€here€to€me.ðð€€Dr.€Schooley€described€the€plaintiffððs€symptoms€as€beingÏconsistent€with€his€nerve€roots€being€pinched€by€a€disc€in€his€neck€ð ðso€I€took€theÏdisk€out€of€his€neck€and€did€a€bone€fusion.ððÌà ` àThe€result€was€unsatisfactory€and€Dr.€Schooley€said,€ð ðI€had€to€go€back€in€hisÏneck€in€the€òòfrontóó€and€take€out€a€little€more€bone.ððÐ Ð( $" Ðà ` àThe€result€was€again€unsatisfactory,€and€ð ðwe€eventually€went€back€for€a€thirdÏoperation€and€took€out€some€bone€in€the€òòback.ððóóÐ -`(& Ðà ` àBased€on€the€òòAMA€Guidelines€to€the€Evaluationóó€of€Permanent€Impairment,Ð 0/€*( Ð4th€Ed.,€for€a€DRE€œcervicothoracic›€Category€III€impairment.€Dr.€Schooley€rated€theÏplaintiffððs€impairment€at€15€percent.Ìà ` àOn€cross„examination,€he€conceded€that€his€partner,€Dr.€Hester,€had€examinedÏand€treated€the€plaintiff.€€Dr.€Hesterððs€notes€revealed,€òòð ðI€anticipate€it€will€be€anotherÐ °730 Ðtwo€or€three€months€before€heððs€recovered€sufficiently€to€return€to€work.ððóó€€Dr.Ð Ð9 52 ÐSchooley€acknowledged€that€the€plaintiff€was€Dr.€Hesterððs€patient,€and€did€not€knowÏwhat€directed€the€plaintiff€ð ðto€meðð€unless€Dr.€Hester€was€busy€and€ð ðI€was€the€newÏphysician€here€at€that€time€and€I€didnððt€have€as€many€patients€as€Ray€[Dr.€Hester]Ïdid€and€that€may€be€why€I€got€him.ðð€€€Ìò òòòà@ªªÌàThe€Findings€of€the€Trial€CourtˆÐ 0 € Ðó óóóà ` àThe€Chancellor€found€that€the€plaintiff€was€justified€in€going€to€Dr.€SchooleyÐ Lœ  Ðbecause€he€was€not€getting€relief€from€his€persistent€pain,€and€that€the€services€ofÏDr.€Schooley€were€reasonable€and€necessary€since€he€was€the€only€physician€whoÏordered€an€MRI,€the€most€effective€diagnostic€tool.€€Based€on€Dr.€SchooleyððsÏopinion€of€15€percent€impairment,€the€Chancellor€found€that€the€plaintiff€had€a€35Ïpercent€permanent€partial€vocational€impairment€to€his€whole€body€for€whichÏbenefits€were€awarded.€€The€medical€expenses€of€Dr.€Schooley€ð ðand€those€providedÏat€his€behestðð€were€approved.€€Whether€the€multipliers€were€properly€applied€is€notÏan€issue.Ìà ` àWe€note€that€the€Chancellor€did€not€comment€on€the€fact€that€the€threeÏsurgeries€failed€to€alleviate€the€pain,€according€to€the€testimony€of€the€plaintiff.Ìò òòòà@ÆÆ)ÌàThe€IssuesˆÐ ¬&ü!  Ðó óóóÓÓI.à8 ` àWhether€the€employer€is€liable€for€the€unauthorized€expenses€incurredÐ È($" Ðby€the€plaintiff€and€whether€the€unauthorized€medical€treatment€wasÏreasonable€and€necessary.Ð ` 8"` 8" ÐÌII.à8 ` àWhether€the€claimant€is€entitled€to€a€15€percent€whole€body€medicalÐ -X(& Ðrating.Ð ` 8"` 8" ÐÌÓÓò òòòà@Ö Ö ÌàThe€œIssue›€of€Unauthorized€Medical€TreatmentˆÐ 80ˆ+) Ðó óóóà ` àT.C.A.€ðð€50„6„204€requires€the€employer€to€furnish€free€of€charge€to€theÐ T2¤-+ Ðemployee€all€medical€expenses€as€may€be€reasonably€required€and€that:ÌÓÓà8 ` à(4)€The€injured€employee€shall€accept€the€medical€benefits€affordedÏhereunder;€provided,€that€the€employer€shall€designate€a€group€of€threeÏâ â(3)€or€more€reputable€physicians€or€surgeons€.€.€.€from€which€theÐ ´841 Ðinjured€employee€shall€have€the€privilege€of€selecting€the€operatingÏsurgeon€or€the€attending€physician€.€.€.Ð ` 8"` 8" Ðâ âÌà ` àSubsection€(d)(6)€provides€that:ÌÌà8 ` àIf€the€injured€employee€refuses€.€.€.€to€accept€the€medical€or€specializedÏmedical€services€which€the€employer€is€required€to€furnish€under€theÏprovisions€of€this€law,€his€right€to€compensation€shall€be€suspendedÏand€no€compensation€shall€be€due€and€payable€while€he€continues€suchÏrefusal.Ð ` 8"` 8" ÐÌò òòòà@ÂÂ)ÌàDiscussionˆÐ `°  ÐÌÓÓà ` àó óóóà ¸ àThese€statutory€mandates€are€clearly€expressed.€€The€issue€ofÐ |Ì  Ðunauthorized€or€unapproved€medical€services€usually€arises€in€instances€wherein€theÏemployer€has€failed€to€furnish€a€panel€of€physicians€in€conformity€with€the€statute,Ïand€the€employee€has€chosen€a€physician€unilaterally.€€òòSee,€e.g.,€Rice€Bottling€Co.Ð Ü, Ðv.€œHumphreys›,óó€372€S.W.2d€170€(Tenn.€1963).€€But€even€in€such€cases,€the€SupremeÐ üL ÐCourt€has€refused€to€hold€that€in€every€instance€the€failure€of€the€employer€to€furnishÏa€panel€of€three€physicians€renders€the€employer€liable€for€the€expenses€ofÏphysicians€chosen€by€the€employee.€€òòSee,€e.g.,€Employers€Insurance€of€œWausau›€v.Ð \!¬ ÐCarter,€óó572€S.W.2d€174€(Tenn.€1975).€€When€the€employer€has€complied€with€theÐ |#Ì Ðstatute€and€furnished€the€employee€with€a€panel€of€physicians,€as€is€the€case€here,Ïthe€employee€has€a€rather€heavy€burden€of€demonstrating€why€he€disdained€theÏservices€of€the€panel€of€physicians.€€òòœBaggett›€v.€Jay€Garment€Co.,€óó826€S.W.2d€437Ð Ü),%# Ð(Tenn.€1992).€€The€plaintiff€argues€that€he€was€justified€in€seeking€the€surgicalÏservices€of€Dr.€Schooley€because€the€panel€physicians€afforded€him€no€relief€andÏrefused€to€perform€surgery.€€The€Chancellor€agreed€that€since€none€of€the€panelÏphysicians€ordered€an€MRI,€as€did€Dr.€Schooley,€the€plaintiff€was€justified€inÏseeking€Dr.€Schooleyððs€services.€€We€do€not€agree,€because€case€law€does€notÏâ âsupport€the€rather€flagrant€deviation€from€the€statute€evident€in€this€case.Ð œ6ì1/ Ðà ` àParenthetically,€at€the€outset,€we€note€that€it€was€òòDr.€Hesteróó€whose€servicesÐ ° Ðâ âwere€so€aggressively€sought€by€the€plaintiff,€òòand€not€those€of€Dr.€Schooley.óó€€We€alsoÐ Ð  Ðnote€that€Dr.€Hester€told€the€plaintiff€that,€after€conservative€treatment,€òòhe€couldÐ ð@ Ðreturn€to€work,óó€and€declined€to€perform€surgery.€€The€plaintiff€then€sought€theÐ  ` Ðservices€of€Dr.€Schooley,€who€was€ð ðnewðð€to€the€practice,€and€who€proceeded€toÏperform€three,€repeat€three,€surgeries€on€the€plaintiff,€which€were€not€successful.€ÏThe€argument€of€the€employer€that€these€surgeries€were€unnecessary€focusesÏattention,€because€(1)€Dr.€Schooley€was€aware€of€the€opinion€of€his€experiencedÏpartner€that€three€months€of€conservative€treatment€was€indicated,€and€(2)€heÏnevertheless€performed€three€(3)€unsuccessful€surgeries.€€It€is€reasonable€to€concludeÏthat€in€no€small€measure€the€œimportunation›€of€the€plaintiff€for€immediate€relief€ofÏhis€pain€was€a€factor€in€these€repeated€procedures.€€We€also€note€that€theÏexperienced€plaintiff€was€fully€aware€of€the€workersðð€compensation€lawððsÏrequirements,€and€that€he€was€informed€no€œless›€than€òòfive€(5)€timesóó€that€Dr.€Hester€„Ð P   Ðor€his€group€„€was€not€approved€owing€to€a€history€of€œunsuccessful›€surgeries.€€BeÏthat€as€it€may,€the€employer€was€under€no€duty€to€explain€the€reasons€for€theÏdisapprobation€of€Drs.€Hester€and€Schooley;€it€complied€with€its€statutory€duty,€and,Ïsignificantly,€even€òòoffered€to€arrange€for€the€services€of€other€board„certifiedÐ Ð( $" Ðneurosurgeons,€óódisdained€by€the€plaintiff.Ð ð*@&$ Ðà ` àThe€plaintiff€argues€that€he€gave€notice€to€the€employer€of€his€intention€toÏseek€the€services€of€Dr.€Schooley,€and€was€justified€in€doing€so€because€only€Dr.ÏSchooley€correctly€diagnosed€his€condition.€€The€fallacy€of€this€argument€is€to€beÏfound€in€the€fact€that€(*1)€the€statute€would€thereby€be€rendered€meaningless,€andÏ(2)€the€record€does€not€reflect€that€Dr.€Schooleyððs€diagnosis€or€treatment€wasÏcorrect.€€The€thrust€of€all€the€cases€dealing€with€the€issue€of€unauthorized€medicalÏtreatment€is€that€an€employee€may€not€act€on€his€own€initiative€under€allÐ Ð9 52 Ðcircumstances,€òòœPickett›€v.€œChatt›.€œConv›.€&€Nursing€Home,€Inc.,€óó627€S.W.2d€941Ð ° Ð(Tenn.€1982),€and€cases€cited,€and€that€the€refusal€of€an€employee€to€accept€theÏservices€of€panel€physicians,€on€the€one€hand,€or€to€seek€additional€medicalÏtreatment,€on€the€other,€must€be€resolved€on€a€case€by€case€basis.€€òòRice€Brothers,Ð  ` Ðsupra.óó€€The€holding€in€òòCon.€Coal€Co.€v.€Pride,€óó452€S.W.2d€349€(Tenn.€1970),Ð 0 € Ðquoted€with€approval€in€òòBuchanan,€supra,€óóis€clear€on€the€point.€€Under€the€clearÐ P   Ðfacts€of€this€case€we€hold€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€ChancellorððsÏfindings€(1)€that€the€plaintiff€was€justified€in€seeking€the€services€of€Dr.€Schooley,Ïand€that€(2)€the€employer€is€liable€for€the€payment€of€his€and€Dr.€Hesterððs€fees€andÏrelated€charges.€€The€decretal€provision€respecting€such€charges€„€$58,917.98€„€isÏvacated.Ìò òòòà@44ÌàThe€Issue€of€15€Percent€Medical€RatingˆÐ ` Ðó óóóà ` àThe€employer€argues€that€the€medical€rating€of€fifteen€percent€is€against€theÐ ,| Ðweight€of€the€medical€proof,€and€is€not€supported€by€Dr.€Schooleyððs€testimony.׃×Ý ƒ %ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×Ð L œ Ðà ` àDr.€McPherson€assessed€a€two€percent€rating;€the€remaining€physicians€foundÏno€impairment.Ìà ` àDr.€Schooleyððs€rating€was€based€on€the€DRE€Category€III,€which€requires€aÏpatient€to€have€significant€signs€of€radiculopathy€such€as€loss€of€reflexes€orÏunilateral€atrophy€with€greater€than€a€2€cm.€decrease€in€circumference€comparedÏwith€the€unaffected€side.€€We€reproduce€Dr.€Schooleyððs€testimony:ÌÓÓQ:à0 ` àThe€permanent€impairment€that€youððve€assigned,€itððs€DRE€Category€III;€tellÐ ,/|*( Ðme€the€basis€of€that€opinion,€please.Ð ` $` $ ÐÌA:à0 ` àItððs€defined€as€radiculopathy€in€his€arm.€€And€in€the€book,€if€you€look€it€up,Ð \2¬-+ Ðit€says€radiculopathy,€and€my€opinion€is€thatððs€what€he€had€from€that€nerveÏbeing€injured,€and€thatððs€why€he€gets€that€rating,€in€my€opinion.Ð ` $` $ ÐÌQ:à0 ` àO.K.€€Do€you€have€a€DRE€handy?М6ì1/` $` $ ÐA:à0 ` àItððs€based€on€this.€[the€referenced€book]а` $` $ ÐÌMr..€Abernathy:à0  àIððd€like€to€attach€a€copy€of€that€page€as€an€exhibit.ÐÐ $$ ÐÌQ:à0 ` àòòDid€he€have€loss€of€reflexes?Ðð@` $` $ ÐÌóóA:à0 ` àòòNo.Ð `` $` $ ÐÌóóQ:à0 ` àòòDid€he€have€unilateral€atrophy?óóÐ0 €` $` $ ÐÌA:à0 ` àòòNo.óó€€ÐP  ` $` $ ÐÌÓÓà ` àññœññœññWe€find€Dr.€Schooleyððs€opinionññññ›ññññIf€a€patient€qualifies€for€cervicothoracic€Category€III,€the€impairment€is€15Ïpercent€whole€person,€but€the€patient€must€have€òòsignificantóó€òòsigns€of€radiculopathy,óóÐ  ` Ðsuch€as€loss€of€relevant€reflexes€or€unilateral€atrophy.€€The€òòGuidelinesóó€clearly€soÐ 0 € Ðprovide;€but€Dr.€Schooley€admitted€that€òòthe€plaintiff€had€neither€loss€of€reflexes€norÐ P   Ðunilateral€atrophy.€€óóConsequently,€his€ññññopinionññ›€of€15€percent€whole€person€impairment€œññcannot›Ïwithstand›Ïscrutiny.›€›€The›Ïfoundational›€basis›€for›€it›Ïdisappeared›€with›€his›Ïtestimony,›€for›Ïwhich›€the›Ïappellee›Ïoffered›€no›Ïenlightening›Ïexplanation.›Ì›à ` àWe›Ïrevert›€ññtoññ€be€ññññññ;essññññññÏless€credible€thanññ›€the€impairment€rating€of€Dr.€McPherson,€who€opined€that€theÏplaintiff€had€an€impairment€rating€of€two€percent.€€Considering€the€record€as€aÏwhole,€we€conclude€that€the€plaintiff€has€a€whole€body€disability€of€ten€percent€andÏthe€judgment€will€be€modified€œaccordingly.ññ€€ññññ€Costs€are€assessed€to€the€parties€evenly.ññ›ÌÓÓÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à_______________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àWilliam€H.€Inman,€Senior€JudgeÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌWilliam€M.€Barker,€JusticeÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌJoe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€Special€JudgeœÔ†ÿÿÔÔ†ÿÿÔÔ  ÔÔ  Ôñ^ñ