ÿWPCr" 8#  UN+ %y 0 (w@§4çû AQ  0l[ 0DÇ 0J  0TU 0^© 0h 0ro 0|á 0†] 0ãs 1u{ 0dð BT Æq 0D7 0@{ 0D» D/ÿ B. D3K U>~ U*¼ U*æ B) DC9 AM| É Ú˾¥Xcf»v~!vÓŸ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ DDE[PDÓ€!WX$ould€have€su3|x! !"#%Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$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 dƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó'''÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Times< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d....7Border 1dd "/Cþÿ << Gÿÿ øÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€+ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ!"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€-ÔÔ€-ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€-XÔÌÌò òJune€1,€1998ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€-ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó ÐÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€+ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€+&ÔÔ€-ÔTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„207(4)(A)(i)€provides€that€compensation€for€permanent€totalÏdisability€ð ðshall€be€paid€during€the€period€of€such€permanent€total€disability€until€the€employeeÏreaches€the€age€of€sixty„five€(65).€.€.€.ðð€€Ô€+ÔÔ€+XÔÌ ´Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€+ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€+&ÔÔ€-ÔTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„102(a)(6)€provides€that€ð ðmaximum€total€benefit€means€the€sumÏof€all€weekly€benefits€to€which€a€worker€may€be€entitled.ðð€€The€maximum€total€benefit€for€ð ðinjuriesÏarising€on€or€after€July€1,€1992,€shall€be€four€hundred€(400)€weeks€times€the€maximum€weeklyÏbenefit€except€in€instances€of€permanent€total€disability.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„102(a)(6)(C).€ÏTenn.€€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„207(4)(B)€provides€that€in€cases€of€permanent€total€disability,€anÏemployee€is€to€be€compensated€as€provided€for€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„207(4)(A)€„€to€ageÏsixty„five€„€ð ðprovided,€that€the€total€amount€of€compensation€payable€hereunder€shall€not€exceedÏthe€maximum€total€benefit.€.€.€.ððÔ€-XÔÔ€+ÔÌ NÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€+ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€-ÔÔ€-&ÔSubsection€(a)(1)€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„208€provides€in€pertinent€part:€€à8 àð ðIf€anÏemployee€has€previously€sustained€a€permanent€physical€disability€from€any€cause€or€origin€andÏbecomes€permanently€and€totally€disabled€through€a€subsequent€injury,€such€employee€shall€beÏentitled€to€compensation€from€such€employeeððs€employer€or€the€employerððs€insurance€companyÏonly€for€the€disability€that€would€have€resulted€from€the€subsequent€injury,€and€such€previousÏinjury€shall€not€be€considered€in€estimating€the€compensation€to€which€such€employee€may€beÏÔ&  Ôentitled€.€.€.€.ððÔ'  ÔÔ€+ÔÔ€+XÔÌ \Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€+ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€-ÔÔ€-&ÔSubsection(b)(1)(A)€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„208€provides:€€ð ðIn€cases€where€theÏinjured€employee€has€received€or€will€receive€a€workersðð€compensation€award€or€awards€forÏpermanent€disability€to€the€body€as€a€whole,€and€the€combination€of€such€awards€equals€orÏexceeds€one€hundred€percent€(100%)€permanent€disability€to€the€body€as€a€whole,€theÏemployee€shall€not€be€entitled€to€receive€from€the€employer€or€its€insurance€carrier€anyÏcompensation€for€permanent€disability€to€the€body€as€a€whole€that€would€be€in€excess€of€oneÏhundred€percent€(100%)€permanent€disability€to€the€body€as€a€whole,€after€combining€awards.ððÔ€+ÔÔ€+XÔÌPtPtHHØ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$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€+ÔÝ  ÝÒ € ÒÒ À ÒØ ØÓ&€,,X°d&ÓÑ  ÑÑ € ÑÔ€-ÔÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌà@ à(Heard€in€Nashville)òòò òÌÙ€ ÙœßR€01/A1-j|T` Å `€€@ÿRß›ÌÌÓ ` °‡X»Q€%ŽX Óó óóóPATRICIA€LOVE,à àà àà àòòò òà àóóó ó)€ò òFOR€PUBLICATIONó óÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)€ò òFiled:€œJune€1,€1998ó óÌà àPlaintiff/Appellant,à àà àà à)€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)€Ïà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àMadison€Circuit€€€à àAMERICAN€OLEAN€TILE€COMPANYà à)Ìand€LIBERTY€MUTUAL€INSURANCEà à)à àHon.€Whit€Lafon,€JudgeÌCOMPANY,à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)€No.€02„S„01„9508„CV„00077Ìà àDefendants/Appellees,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌANDà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌSUE€ANN€HEAD,€DIRECTOR€OF€THEà à)ÌDIVISION€OF€WORKERSðð€à àà à)ÌCOMPENSATION,€STATE€OF€à àà à)ÌTENNESSEE,à àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellee.à àà à)à àà àÌÌÌÌÓ&` ܆X»QÈ€%ŽX&ÓòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à àà àà àòòà àà àFor€the€Appellee,€Sue€Ann€Head,óóÌà àà àà àà àà àòòà àà àDirector€of€the€Division€of€Workersðð€óóÌLisa€June€Coxòòà àà àà àà àà àCompensationóó:ÌJacksonÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJohn€Knox€WalkupÌòòFor€the€Appellees,€American€Oleanà àà àóóAttorney€General€and€ReporteròòÌTile€Company€and€American€MutualÌInsurance€Companyóó:à àà àà àà àSue€A.€SheldonÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌLewis€L.€CobbÌCatherine€B.€Claytonà àà àà àà àSandra€E.€KeithÌJacksonà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDianne€Stamey€DycusÌòòFor€the€Amicus€Curiaeóó,à àà àà àà àSenior€Counselà àÌòòTennessee€Trial€Lawyersà àà àà àóóà àÌòòAssociationóó:à àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌòòà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌóóJ.€Anthony€FarmerÌKnoxvilleòòÌà@ àóóò òÔ€-„ÔO€P€I€N€I€O€NòòÔ€-XÔó óÌÌóóÌJUDGMENT€OF€TRIAL€COURT€AND€WORKERSðð€à0 àà àà0 àà àà€ àDROWOTA,€J.ÌCOMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANEL€REVERSED€ÌIN€PART€AND€AFFIRMED€IN€PARTÇÓ  ÓÓÓÔ€+ÔÑ7€œªXdðXXdð7Ñ€à àà àÔ€-ÔIn€this€workersðð€compensation€action,€the€employee,€Patricia€Love,Ïplaintiff„appellant,€has€appealed€from€a€judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€of€MadisonÏCounty€awarding€her€permanent€total€disability€benefits€to€age€65€or€until€theÏpayment€of€such€benefits€reached€the€maximum€total€benefit.€€The€trial€courtÏapportioned€the€award€67.5€percent€to€the€Second€Injury€Fund€and€32.5€percentÏto€the€employer,€American€Olean€Tile€Company,€and€its€insurer,€Liberty€MutualÏInsurance€Company,€defendants„appellees.€€The€Special€WorkersððÏCompensation€Appeals€Panel,€upon€reference€for€findings€of€fact€andÏconclusions€of€law€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(5),€affirmed€theÏtrial€court.€€Thereafter,€the€employee€filed€a€motion€for€full€Court€review€of€theÏPanelððs€decision.€€We€granted€the€motion€for€review€to€determine€(1)€whether€itÏwas€error€not€to€have€awarded€benefits€payable€to€age€65€notwithstanding€theÏmaximum€total€benefit,€and€(2)€whether€the€apportionment€between€the€employerÏand€the€Second€Injury€Fund€was€correct.€€After€examining€the€record€before€usÏand€considering€the€relevant€authorities,€we€€reverse€the€decision€of€the€lowerÏcourts€to€subject€the€employeeððs€award€to€the€maximum€total€benefit.€€However,Ïwe€affirm€the€apportionment€of€the€award€between€the€employer€and€the€SecondÏInjury€Fund€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„208(a).€€ÌÌà àà àThe€employee,€Patricia€Love,€was€51€years€old€at€the€time€of€trial.€ÏShe€has€an€eleventh€grade€education.€€Her€prior€work€experience€consists€ofÍworking€as€a€housekeeper,€nurseððs€aide,€janitor,€and€performing€production€workÏand€manual€labor.€€She€has€worked€for€the€defendant€employer,€American€OleanÏTile€Company,€for€approximately€seven€years€in€various€capacities,€includingÏjanitorial€and€service€work.€€ÌÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€In€February€and€March€of€1993,€the€employee€gradually€developedÏwork„related€carpal€tunnel€syndrome€in€both€of€her€arms.€€She€also€suffered€aÏwork„related€low€back€strain.€€The€employee€had€nonwork„related€pre„existingÏkidney€damage,€back€problems,€and€uncontrollable€high€blood€pressure.€€HerÏphysicians€assigned€permanent€anatomical€impairment€ratings€of€18€to€23Ïpercent€to€the€body€as€a€whole.€€The€employee€is€unable€to€work€because€herÏback€does€not€allow€her€to€sit€for€long€periods€of€time,€lift,€bend,€stretch,€or€climb.€ÏHer€hands€and€wrists€are€weak,€swollen€and€painful.€€€The€parties€do€not€disputeÏthat€she€is€permanently€and€totally€disabled.€€ÌÌà àà àThe€trial€judge€found€the€employee€to€be€permanently€and€totallyÏdisabled.€€Benefits€were€awarded€to€age€65€òòoróó€until€the€payment€of€benefitsÏreached€the€maximum€total€benefit,€which€in€this€case€was€$127,296.€€The€trialÏjudge€further€found€that€the€employeeððs€pre„existing€disability€was€67.5€percent,Ïand€that€the€disability€from€the€February€and€March€1993€injuries€(carpel€tunnelÏin€both€arms€and€a€low„back€strain)€was€32.5€percent.€€Thus,€benefits€wereÍapportioned€67.5€percent€to€the€Second€Injury€Fund€and€32.5€percent€to€theÏemployer€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„208(a).ÌÌà àà àThe€Workersðð€Compensation€Appeals€Panel€held€that€awards€ofÏpermanent€total€disability€made€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„207(4)(A)(i)€areÏsubject€to€payment€of€the€maximum€total€benefit.× ƒ2 ××  ×€€Also,€the€Panel€affirmed€theÏtrial€courtððs€apportionment€of€benefits€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„208(a).€ÏThereafter,€the€employee€filed€a€motion€for€full€Court€review€of€the€PanelððsÏdecision€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(5)(B).€€This€Court€grantedÏthe€motion€and€entered€an€order€transferring€the€case€from€Jackson€to€NashvilleÏto€be€heard€with€the€companion€case€of€òòBomely€v.€Mid„America€Corp.,€d/b/aÏBurger€Kingóó,€____€S.W.€2d€___€(Tenn.€1998)€filed€simultaneously€with€thisÏopinion.ÌÌà àà àThe€primary€question€presented€is€what€effect,€if€any,€does€theÏmaximum€total€benefit€provision€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„102(a)(6)× ƒ3 ××  ×€have€onÍawards€of€permanent€total€disability€made€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„207(4)(A)(i),€which€makes€benefits€payable€to€age€65.€€€We€have€recentlyÏdecided€this€issue€by€concluding€that€awards€of€permanent€total€disability€areÏpayable€to€age€65€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„207(4)(A)(i),€without€regard€toÏthe€monetary€cap€imposed€by€the€400€week€maximum€total€benefit€provision€ofÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„102(a)(6).€€òòSeeóó€òòBomely€v.€Mid„America€Corp.,€d/b/aÏBurger€Kingóó,€òò€€€€€€óó€S.W.2d€òò€€€€€€óó€(Tenn.€1998)(Holder,€J.,€dissenting€on€otherÏgrounds).€€Therefore,€the€decision€of€the€lower€courts€in€the€present€case€toÏsubject€the€employeeððs€permanent€total€award€to€the€400€week€maximum€totalÏbenefit€provision€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„102(a)(6)€is€reversed.€€The€award€ofÏbenefits€shall€be€paid€until€the€employee€reaches€the€age€of€65€as€required€byÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„207(4)(A)(i).€€ÌÌà àà àThe€second€issue€is€whether€the€award€should€be€apportionedÏbetween€the€employer€and€the€Second€Injury€Fund€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððððÍ50„6„208(a)× ƒ4 ××  ×€or€208(b).× ƒ5 ××  ×€€The€trial€court€determined€that€the€employeeððs€pre„existing€disability€was€67.5€percent,€and€that€the€disability€from€the€February€andÏMarch€1993€injuries€was€32.5€percent.€€The€trial€judge€apportioned€benefits€onÏthis€basis€„€67.5€percent€to€the€Second€Injury€Fund€and€32.5€percent€to€theÏemployer.€€Although€the€trial€courtððs€order€indicates€that€benefits€wereÏapportioned€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„208(a)€òòandóó€(b),€it€is€apparentÏthat€subsection€(a)€was€applied.€ÌÌà àà àThe€facts€of€this€case€satisfy€the€requirements€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÏ50„6„208(a).€€The€employee€had€sustained€prior€injuries€from€ð ðany€cause€orÏoriginðð€which€caused€permanent€disability,€the€employer€had€notice€of€herÏpreexisting€conditions,€and€the€employee€subsequently€became€permanentlyÏand€totally€disabled€as€a€result€of€the€compensable€injuries€occurring€in€1993.€€ÏòòSeeóó€òòBomelyóó,€òò€€€€€€óó€S.W.2d€at€òò€€€€€€óó.€€€Accordingly,€the€employer€pays€for€the€disabilityÍthat€resulted€from€the€last€injury€which€rendered€the€employee€totally€andÏpermanently€disabled€without€consideration€of€any€prior€injuries,€which€the€trialÏcourt€correctly€found€to€be€32.5€percent.€€The€Second€Injury€Fund€is€responsibleÏfor€the€remaining€67.5€percent€of€the€award.€€Thus,€the€apportionment€made€byÏthe€trial€court€under€subsection€(a),€and€affirmed€by€the€Panel,€is€correct.€€ÏSubsection€(b)€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„208€does€not€apply€because€theÏemployee€did€not€have€any€prior€awards€for€permanent€disability€to€the€body€as€aÏwhole€which,€when€coupled€with€the€most€recent€award,€equal€or€exceed€100Ïpercent.€€òòSeeóó€òòBomelyóó,€òò€€€€€€óó€S.W.2d€at€òò€€€€€€óó.€€€€€ÌÌà àà àFor€the€foregoing€reasons,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€reversedÏin€part€and€affirmed€in€part,€and€the€case€is€remanded€for€any€further€proceedingsÏwhich€may€be€necessary€consistent€with€this€Courtððs€decision€in€òòBomelyóó,€whichÏheld€€in€part€€that€the€apportionment€of€awards€between€an€employer€and€theÏSecond€Injury€Fund€shall€be€based€on€the€total€number€of€weeks€to€age€65,Ïrather€than€limiting€the€employerððs€liability€to€the€first€400€weeks€of€benefits.€€òòSeeóóÏòòBomelyóó,€___€S.W.2d€at€____€(Holder,€J.,€dissenting).€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxedÏone„half€to€the€employer€and€its€insurer€and€one„half€to€the€Second€Injury€Fund,Ïfor€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.€€ÌÓÓÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à___‚____________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àFrank€F.€Drowota,€IIIÌà àà àà àà àà àà àJustice€ÌÌò òConcur:ó óÌÌAnderson,€C.J.;ÌBirch,€J.ÌÌHolder,€J.€„€Separate€Concurring€and€Dissenting€OpinionÌÌReid,€J.€not€participating.