ÿWPCß :# <UNG %• 0Λ4i}UFŒÒ 0Ú 0Dìw@0pUFx 0J¾ 0T 0^\ 0hº 0r" 0|” 0† 0– 1u& 0d› AQÿ ÆP 0D 0@Z 0Dš D/Þ B  D3* B]U>zU*¸U6âB)DCA AM„U*Ñ©û¤k#v~ŽvÓ ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX(¦¾v$¡¡ÑŒ Œ ÑÑÑÒ°ÒÒà°ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ7€ÖXXdìXXdì7ÑÔ€Xb%XXXÔê‚_#63|x¦ <û 9Z ‹.Courier New Regular(Â(3Ý:$¤¤Ý ƒ¾v!ÝÑŒ °ÑѰÑÒ°ÒÒà°ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ7€æXXdìdì7ÑÔ€XXXXÔÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ’ “ E” • – e— ˜ ™ eš Ó€¤ <4šÛ 9Z ‹.Courier New Regular2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ!"#$&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó(('÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd----'ÿÿdxd d< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Times< Œ 9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d11117Border 1dd!#2Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial ŸÝ ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÑ Œ ÑÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ à ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€0ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€4ÔÔ€4ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€4XÔÌÌDecemberÏ22,Ï1997ÌÌCecilÏW.ÏCrowsonÌAppellateÏCourtÏClerkÔ  Ôó ó uÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÑ Œ ÑÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ à ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€0ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝA€similar€petition€was€filed€in€February€1993,€and€an€order€ofÏnon„suit€was€entered€January€31,€1995.Ì aÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÑ Œ ÑÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ à ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€0ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝHowever,€we€note€that€absolute€certainty€is€not€required€toÏprove€cause€of€death€in€a€workerððs€compensation€case.€€òòReeser€v.ÏYellow€Freight€System,€Inc.óó,€938€S.W.2d€690,€692€(Tenn.€1997).€€AtÏthis€point,€we€make€no€determination€as€to€whether€there€isÏsufficient€evidence€from€which€the€trial€court€may€determine€causeÏof€death.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€.ÔÑ Œ ÑÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ à ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ#€//Xd#ÑÑ#€//Xd#ÑÔ€0ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÑ  ÑÓ` °‚X˜XÓÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›Ñ7€æXXdìXXdì7ќـ!ÙßR€352A1-j|` ‚- `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌÌÌà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌÌÌÌWILLIAM€E.€CUNNINGHAM,€€€€€€€€€€€€à à)€€€FOR€PUBLICATIONÌAdministrator€of€the€Estate€ofà à)ÌROBERT€W.€CUNNINGHAM,€SR.,€andà à)ÌROBERT€W.€CUNNINGHAM,€JR.,à àà à)€€€œFILED:€›€œDECEMBER€22,›€1997Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€à àà àà àà àà à)Ì€€€€€Plaintiffs/Petitioners/à àà à)Ì€€€€€Appellantsà àà àà àà à)€€€DAVIDSON€COUNTY€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)€€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)€€€HON.€CAROL€MCCOY,ÌSHELTON€SECURITY€SERVICES,€INC.,à à)à à€€CHANCELLORÌand€EMPLOYERS€INSURANCE€OF€WAUSAU,à à)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à àà à)Ì€€€€€Defendants/Respondents/€€€€à à)€€€NO.€01„S„01„9701„CH„00011Ì€€€€€Appelleesà àà àà àà àà à)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌòòFor€Appellantsóó:òòà àà àà àà àà àFor€Appelleesóó:ÌÌTERRY€R.€CLAYTON€€€€€€à àà àà àà àH.€MICHAEL€BENNETTÌNashville,€TNà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TNÌÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àOPINIONÌÌÌÌÌÌÌREVERSED;€REMANDEDà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àBIRCH,€J.ÌÑ7€XXdÖXXdì7ÑÓÓà àIn€this€workerððs€compensation€case,€the€trial€courtÏgranted€the€deceased€employeeððs€representative€(ð ðpetitionerðð)Ïpermission€to€file€an€application€for€interlocutory€appeal€under€ÏTenn.€R.€App.€P.€9.€€We€granted€the€application€in€order€toÏdetermine€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€ruling€that€the€remainsÏof€the€employee€be€exhumed€and€autopsied.€€Upon€careful€review€ofÏthe€record,€we€find€that€the€employer,€Shelton€Security€Service,ÏInc.,€and€its€insurance€carrier,€Employers€Insurance€of€WausauÏ(ð ðrespondentsðð),€failed€to€make€a€timely€request€for€an€autopsyÏafter€obtaining€reasonable€notice€of€its€necessity.€€Thus,€theyÏare€not€entitled€to€exhume€and€autopsy€the€remains€of€the€deceasedÏemployee.ÌÌà@ àIÌÌà àThe€record€in€this€case€includes€the€pleadings,€theÏdeposition€and€affidavits€of€medical€experts,€the€deathÏcertificate,€and€the€trial€courtððs€findings€entered€November€19,Ï1996.€€Pertinent€portions€thereof€indicate€that€RobertÏW.Cunningham,€Sr.,€the€employee,€worked€as€a€security€guard€forÏthe€respondent„employer,€Shelton€Security€Services,€Inc.€€TheÏemployee€was€assigned€to€provide€security€in€and€about€the€Little€ÏBarn,€a€Nashville€convenience€market.€€ÌÌà àWhile€performing€his€duties€at€the€market€on€March€5,Ï1992,€the€employee€became€involved€in€a€confrontation€with€eitherÏtwo€or€three€patrons€whom€he€had€asked€to€leave€the€marketÏpremises.€€The€confrontation,€though€verbal€only,€was€apparently€aÏheated€one.€€Several€minutes€after€œthis›€incident,€the€employee€wasÏfound€unconscious€in€the€front€seat€of€his€car.€€Emergency€medicalÏpersonnel€responded€to€the€scene,€and€he€was€transported€to€theÏhospital€by€ambulance.€€All€efforts€to€revive€him€failed;€he€wasÏpronounced€ð ðdead€on€arrivalðð€at€the€hospital.€€œThe›€medicalÏexaminer€certified€the€cause€of€death€as€ð ðarterioscleroticÍcardiovascular€disease.ðð€€The€death€œcertificate,€›dated€April€17,Ï1992,€indicates€that€no€autopsy€was€performed.ÌÌà@ àIIÌ€€Ìà àThe€procedural€history€of€this€case€is€central€to€ourÏdiscussion.€€On€August€31,€1995,€a€petition€for€benefits€claimedÏunder€workerððs€compensation€provisions€was€filed€by€theÏpetitioner.× ƒ6 ××  ×€€In€an€answer€filed€October€4,€1995,€the€respondentsÏdenied€that€any€injury€arose€out€of€or€in€the€course€of€theÏemployment.€€Also€denied€was€the€allegation€that€the€employeeÏsuffered€an€accidental€injury€or€occupational€disease.€€Moreover,Ïthe€respondents€stated€that€they€did€not€know€what€caused€theÏemployeeððs€death.ÌÌà àCounsel€for€the€petitioner€took€the€deposition€of€MelvinÏLightford,€M.D.,€on€June€27,€1996.€€Lightford€opined,€inter€alia,Ïthat€the€cause€of€death€as€certified€by€the€medical€examiner€isÏnot€always€conclusive.€€Rather,€because€arterioscleroticÍcardiovascular€disease€is€a€common€cause€of€death,€it€is€routinelyÏlisted€on€the€death€certificate€as€the€cause€of€death€in€casesÏwhere€no€autopsy€has€been€performed.€€ÌÌà àAlso€included€in€the€record€are€the€affidavits€of€RobertÏC.€Ripley,€M.D.,€and€Charles€Harlan,€M.D.,€both€filed€on€OctoberÏ28,€1996.€€Ripley€and€Harlan,€and€Lightford€as€well,€statedÏessentially€that€the€cause€of€the€employeeððs€death€could€not€beÏascertained€with€ð ðabsolute€certaintyðð€unless€an€autopsy€were€to€beÏperformed.× ƒ7 ××  ×€ÌÌà àOn€October€28,€1996,€the€respondents€filed€a€motion€inÏthe€trial€court€for€an€order€to€exhume€and€autopsy€the€employeeððsÏremains€on€the€grounds€that€the€cause€of€death€could€not€otherwiseÏbe€ascertained.€€The€trial€court€found€that€the€respondentsÏacquired€knowledge€of€the€necessity€for€an€autopsy€duringÏLightfordððs€deposition€of€June€27,€1996.€€The€trial€court€furtherÍfound€that€the€cause€of€death€was€obscure€or€in€dispute€and€thatÏthe€respondents€had€requested€the€autopsy€within€a€reasonable€timeÏafter€Lightfordððs€deposition.ÌÌà àThe€petitioner€requested€permission€under€Tenn.€R.€App.ÏP.€9€for€an€interlocutory€appeal€to€review€the€challenged€order€onÏgrounds€that€no€review€could€otherwise€be€obtainable€after€entryÏof€a€final€judgment.€€The€trial€court€permitted€the€petitioner€toÏfile€an€application€for€permission€to€appeal€to€this€Court,€and€weÏgranted€the€interlocutory€appeal.€€However,€before€oral€argumentÏcould€be€scheduled,€the€parties€requested€leave€to€submit€theÏcause€on€briefs;€we€granted€that€request€also.ÌÌà àAccordingly,€we€review€the€trial€courtððs€ruling€that€theÏrespondents€are€entitled€to€the€exhumation€and€autopsy€of€theÏemployeeððs€remains.€€Because€this€issue€is€a€question€of€law,€ourÏreview€is€de€novo€with€no€presumption€of€correctness.€€òòRidings€v.ÏRalph€M.€Parsons€Co.óó,€914€S.W.2d€79,€80€(Tenn.€1996).€ÌÌà@ àIIIÌÌà àCourt„ordered€autopsy€in€workerððs€compensation€cases€isÏgoverned€by€both€statute€and€case€law.€€The€controlling€statute,ÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„204(e)(Supp.€1996),€provides€as€follows:€€ÌÓÓÌà8 àà8 àIn€all€death€claims€where€the€causeÏof€death€is€obscure€or€is€disputed,Ïany€interested€party€may€require€anÏautopsy,€the€cost€of€which€is€to€beÏborne€by€the€party€demanding€theÏsame.ÌÓÓÌà àThus,€by€statute,€the€party€requesting€the€autopsy€mustÏdemonstrate€that€the€cause€of€death€ð ðis€obscure€or€is€disputed.ðð€ÏIn€their€answer€to€the€petition€for€workerððs€compensationÏbenefits,€the€respondents€denied€that€the€employee€suffered€anÏaccidental€injury€or€occupational€disease€and€averred€that€theyÏdid€not€know€what€caused€the€employeeððs€death.€€Thus,€cause€ofÏdeath€has€apparently€been€a€matter€of€dispute€since€the€filing€ofÏthe€petition,€and€there€can€be€no€serious€challenge€to€the€trialÏcourtððs€finding€in€this€regard.€ÌÌà àBeyond€those€imposed€by€statute,€two€requirements€areÏimposed€by€judicial€interpretation.€€Chief€Justice€Green,€writingÏfor€the€Court€in€òòBattle€Creek€Coal€and€Coke€Co.€v.€Martinóó,€155ÏTenn.€34,€290€S.W.€18€(1927),€construed€the€subject€statute€asÍbeing€analogous€to€the€provisions€for€an€autopsy€in€insuranceÏcontracts€which€are€uniformly€sustained€if€the€demand€for€theÏautopsy€was€made€within€a€reasonable€time.€€òòId.óó€at€19.€€Thus€aroseÏthe€ð ðtimelinessðð€requirement.€€Timeliness€requires€that€the€partyÏrequesting€the€autopsy€do€so€within€a€reasonable€length€of€timeÏafter€having€knowledge€of€its€necessity.€€The€trial€judge€shouldÏconsider€ð ðthe€time€elapsing€prior€to€a€motion€or€other€proceedingsÏfiled€in€court€demanding€an€autopsy€and€the€time€the€party€soÏdemanding€an€autopsy€had€knowledge€[or]€reasonably€could€have€hadÏknowledge€such€autopsy€was€needed€to€determine€the€cause€ofÏdeath.ðð€€òòRobinson€v.€Nashville€Mach.€Co.óó,€503€S.W.2d€90,€93€(Tenn.Ï1973).€€€Ìà àThe€second€common€law€requirement€for€exhumation€andÏautopsy€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„204€was€articulated€inÏòòRobinsonóó.€€According€to€òòRobinsonóó,€the€demand€for€an€autopsy€mustÏbe€reasonable€as€to€the€occasion€for€its€exercise.€€TheÏreasonableness€of€the€occasion€of€its€exercise€is€determined€byÏthe€presence€or€absence€of€other€credible€evidence,€absent€anÏautopsy,€upon€which€the€court€can€determine€cause€of€death.€€òòId.óó€€ÌÌà àœWe›€do€not€quibble€with€the€trial€courtððs€finding€of€factÏthat€the€respondentsðð€first€acquired€ð ðknowledge€of€the€need€for€anÏautopsyðð€during€Lightfordððs€deposition€of€June€27,€1996.€€ThatÏfinding€notwithstanding,€there€is€a€distinct€difference€betweenÏactual€ð ðknowledgeðð€as€found€by€the€trial€court€and€reasonableÏnotice.€€Under€òòRobinsonóó,€the€time€when€the€respondents€òòreasonablyÏcould€have€had€knowledgeóó€of€the€need€for€an€autopsy,€i.e.,€theÏtime€when€they€acquired€reasonable€notice,€must€also€beÏconsidered.€€ÌÌà àœWe›€find€that€the€respondents€had€reasonable€notice€fromÏthe€pleadings€that€causation€would€be€an€issue„„perhaps€the€onlyÏseriously€contested€issue.€€Once€the€respondents€took€a€positionÏregarding€causation€in€their€answer€filed€October€4,€1995,€itÏbecame€their€responsibility€to€develop€the€issue€promptly.€ÏEspecially€is€this€true€in€light€of€the€cause€of€death€listed€onÏthe€certificate,€which€was€available€to€all€parties€as€early€asÏApril€17,€1992.€€The€respondents€filed€the€autopsy€request€onÏOctober€28,€1996„„over€a€year€after€they€filed€their€answer,€andÏapproximately€four€and€a€half€years€after€the€death€certificateÏbecame€available.€€This€delay€is€longer€than€the€delay€in€previousÍworkerððs€compensation€cases€in€which€a€request€for€an€autopsy€wasÏfound€untimely.€€òòHuey€Bros.€Lumber€Co.€v.€Andersonóó,€519€S.W.2dÏ588,€590€(Tenn.€1975)€(eight€month€delay€unreasonable);€òòRobinsonóó,Ï503€S.W.2d€at€93€(nine€month€delay€unreasonable).€€Therefore,Ïwithin€the€context€of€the€facts€and€circumstances€here€presented,Ïwe€find€that€the€respondentsðð€request€for€exhumation€and€autopsyÏwas€not€timely€œmade.Ì›€€€Ìà àBecause€we€find€the€respondentsðð€unreasonable€delayÏÔ_Ôdispositive€of€the€issue€before€usÔ_Ô,€we€find€it€unnecessary€toÏdiscuss€the€ð ðoccasionðð€œrequirement€›articulated€in€òòRobinsonóó.œ›Ì€€Ìà àIt€results€that€the€order€of€exhumation€and€autopsy€isÏvacated;€the€cause€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€proceedingsÏconsistent€with€this€opinion.ÌÌà àCosts€of€this€cause€are€taxed€against€the€respondents,Ïfor€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.€ÌÓÓÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à_______________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àADOLPHO€A.€BIRCH,€JR.,€JusticeÌÌœCONCUR:›ÌAnderson,€C.J.ÌDrowota,€Reid,€Holder,€œJJ.›