WPC < %Xj^ 0(Pw@4 AQ B-? 0l.U4= 0DqUN 0J M 0D W D/_ 0T 0^ 0h@ B C AM , 0@ 0K2 D3} 0r AM"o 0D5 D+y B 0| 0= 0 1uS 0d 0D,U>pU*B)DC AOD0v~vAXMemo - Traditional  ' '  0 .   ($c:\office\wpwin\template\memo\memo1.wptH     EHHEeDEӀWX$C<< C)Hairline dF>> 4_HeadingsHeadingsXzXXXXXzXzXXXXXz3|x*0]AArial Bold(2$ !  (@ Z 6Times New Roman Regular2 0Indent123  ԃLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ''' dxd2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23   ddd !A<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5("$    ( $ Figure  1  'dxd2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  $%&A<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  'dxdP Pd2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23  "()* ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X(3$ !  <  9p`(&Times New Roman<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d66667Border 1dd 7C << G & !  #d#4  "  55   YYY FILED5X June1,1998CecilCrowson,Jr.5AppellateCourtClerk PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   ion-F Geneva  ion-F Geneva ! . 4  4            \RA'\ћ7lXXdXXd7  ќ5R897A1-j|`  `@R @ INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE@ ATJACKSON PATRICIALOVE,@ ) @ ) Plaintiff/Appellant,@ ) MADISONCIRCUIT@ )v.@ ) Hon.WhitLafon,Judge@ )AMERICANOLEANTILECOMPANY@ ) No.02S019508CV00077andLIBERTYMUTUALINSURANCE@ )COMPANY,@ )@ ) Defendants/Appellees,@ )@ )AND@ )@ )SUEANNHEAD,DIRECTOR,OF@ )THEDIVISIONOFWORKERS'@ )COMPENSATION,STATEOF@ )TENNESSEE,@ )@ ) Defendant/Appellee.@ )   CONCURRINGANDDISSENTINGOPINION    IrelyonmyconcurringanddissentingopinioninBomelyv.MidAmericanCorp.,___S.W.2d___(Tenn.1998).WhileIagreewiththemajority'sconclusionthatawardsofpermanentandtotaldisabilityarepayabletoagesixtyfive,Icontinuetodisagree,asvoicedinmyBomelydissent,withthemajority'sanalysisofapportionmentwhichdiscouragesemployersfromhiringthehandicappedandiscontrarytothestatedlegislativepurposebehindtheSecondInjuryFundlegislation.Anemployer'sliabilityshouldbelimitedtothefirst400weeksofbenefitsunlessthesubsequentinjurywouldhaveinandofitselfcausedpermanentandtotaldisabilityintheabsenceofanypriorinjuriesordisabilities.Insuchcases,theemployershouldbearresponsibilityfortheentireawardtoagesixtyfive. IagreewiththemajoritythatTenn.CodeAnn.506102(a)isapplicabletothiscase.I,however,continuetodisagree,asvoicedinmypreviousdissent,withthemajority'sconclusionthatTenn.CodeAnn.506102(a)&(b)arenotmutuallyexclusiveandmaybeapplicabletothesamecase.Icannotsubscribetoananalysiswhichresultsintwosubsectionsapplyingtothesameinjuryandyieldingdifferentresults.Iwouldapplysubsection(a)exclusivelywheneveranemployeehassustainedpriorinjuriesfrom"anycauseororigin"andbecomes"permanentlyandtotallydisabledthroughasubsequentinjury."Iwouldapplysubsection(b)onlywhenanemployeeisabletocontinuetoearnawagebuthasreceivedcompensablepermanentpartialdisabilityawardsthatintheaggregateexceed100percent.Thisapproachresolvestheambiguitiescausedbythemajority'sapproach,isconsistentwiththeplainlanguageandhistoryofTenn.CodeAnn.506102andfurthersthelegislativeintentwhichpromptedtheSecondInjuryFundlegislation.             JANICEM.HOLDER,JUSTICE