ÿWPCÌ …# VULa %­ 0(³4ÛïU:þ8 0l@ 0D¬ 0Jð 0T: 0^Ž w@ì 0h, 0r” 0| 0†‚ 0 1u˜ 0d U*qB)›DCÄ AMîT BB D3_’v~– 0@vÓT AO'Æv 0D< D/€ B¯˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 .@FÐ Z‹4GeoSlab703 Lt BT LightX($¡¡z!3|x"Arial Regular((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ýþÿDE.eÓ€ 26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d%%%%7Border 1dd€-&Cþÿ << Gÿÿ äÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÔ€$ÔÔ€$ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€$XÔÌÌò òSeptember€27,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€$ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó d))))'ÿÿdxd úÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€$ÔÓ  Óà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóDr.€Harrison€had€previously€treated€plaintiff€for€shoulder€pain€in€OctoberÏ1992.€€At€that€time€Dr.€Harrison€noted€a€history€of€trauma€to€the€shoulder€andÏback.€€1991€x„rays€showed€arthritis€and€degenerative€joint€disease.€€Dr.ÏHarrison€noted€mildly€decreased€range€of€motion€but€no€significant€loss,€normalÏgrip,€and€no€sensory€loss.€€He€advised€plaintiff€against€any€heavy€lifting€orÏstraining.€€He€felt€plaintiffððs€activity€would€be€greatly€limited.€€He€is€certain€thereÏwas€some€permanent€impairment€at€that€time.€€However,€that€pain€never€causedÏplaintiff€to€miss€time€from€work.ÌPtPt HHð@ÿìÿîRd(ühh° @dÿœÿ¦ š("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  ÒStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Geneva ÒÒ  BA Op Geneva Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÓ  ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€$Ôò ò›œ›à@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àSPECIAL€WORKERSðð€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌó óÌò òÌDANNY€J.€ADAMS,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà àà à)à àHENRY€COUNTYÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àà àÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€C.€CREED€McGINLEYÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àJUDGE€€€€€ÌLIBERTY€MUTUAL€INSURANCE€à à)ÌCOMPANY€and€PLUMLEY€à à€€€€€€à à)ÌCOMPANIES,€INC.,à àà àà à)à àNo.€02S01„9512„CV„00132Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)€€Ìà àDefendants€andà àà àà à)ÌÙ€€ÙœßL€'(&;+'h|þP` Å `€€Lß›à àCross„Plaintiffs/Appellants,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìandà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌU.€S.€TOOL€&€GAUGE,€INC.,Ïà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant€andà àà àà à)Ìà àCross„Defendant/Appellee.à à)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌòòFOR€APPELLANTóó:òòà àà àà àà àFOR€APPELLEESóó:€€ÌÌCatherine€B.€Claytonà àà àà àLisa€June€CoxÌSpragins,€Barnett,€Cobbà àà àà à64€Lynoak€CoveÌ€€€€&€Butlerà àà àà àà àà àJackson,€TN€38305ÌPost€Office€Box€2004ÌJackson,€TN€38302„2004à àà àà àFloyd€S.€FlippinÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAdams,€Ryal€&€FlippinÌà àà àà àà àà àà àPost€Office€Box€160Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àHumboldt,€TN€38343ÌÌÌÌÌà@ àòòMEMORANDUM€OPINIONóóÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àMEMBERS€OF€PANEL:ÌÌà@ àLYLE€REID,€JUSTICEÌà@ àHEWITT€TOMLIN,€JR.,€SENIOR€JUDGEÌà@ àCORNELIA€A.€CLARK,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÌÌAFFIRMED€AS€MODIFIEDà àà àà àà àCLARK,€SPECIALÏJUDGEÌAND€REMANDEDÌó óÑ7€BÀXXdæXXdð7ÑÓÓà àThis€workerððs€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€specialÏworkerððs€compensation€appeals€panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€in€accordance€withÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð50„6„225(e)(3)€for€hearing€and€reporting€to€the€SupremeÏCourt€of€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.ÌÌà àLiberty€Mutual€Insurance€Company€(ð ðLiberty€Mutualðð)€and€PlumleyÏCompanies,€Inc.€(ð ðPlumleyðð)€have€appealed€the€trial€courtððs€decision€requiringÏthem€to€pay€plaintiff€workersðð€compensation€benefits€based€on€fifty€percentÏpermanent€impairment€to€the€body€as€a€whole.€€Liberty€Mutual€and€PlumleyÏraise€four€issues:Ìà à1.à àShould€Plumley€be€responsible€for€a€shoulder€injury€that€did€notÏoccur€during€plaintiffððs€employment€there?Ìà à2.à àIs€plaintiffððs€shoulder€injury€claim€against€Plumley€barred€by€hisÏmisrepresentation€of€his€physical€condition?Ìà à3.à àIs€plaintiffððs€claim€of€a€shoulder€injury€barred€by€his€failure€to€giveÏtimely€notice€to€Plumley?Ìà à4.à àShould€plaintiffððs€subsequent€employer,€defendant€U.€S.€Tool€&ÏGauge€(ð ðU.€S.€Toolðð)€be€responsible€for€any€aggravation€to€his€shoulder€whereÏplaintiff€did€not€seek€medical€treatment€until€he€had€worked€for€U.€S.€Tool€forÏabout€five€months?ÌÌà àFor€the€reasons€set€forth€below,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€finding€ofÏliability€but€modify€its€finding€of€impairment.ÌÌà àDanny€Adams€(ð ðplaintiffðð),€born€September€16,€1943,€finished€elevenÏyears€of€school€and€worked€primarily€at€manual€labor€during€his€adult€life.€€OnÏAugust€18,€1993,€while€working€for€Plumley€and€lifting€a€thirty„pound€heater,€heÏbruised€his€right€elbow€when€he€hit€it€against€a€handrail.€€The€result€wasÏswelling€to€the€elbow€to€the€extent€that€it€looked€like€a€small€football€wasÏgrowing€out€of€his€arm.€€Plaintiff€gave€timely€notice€of€this€injury,€was€treated€byÏDr.€James€Robertson€for€a€mild€contusion,€and€was€released€to€return€to€workÏon€September€13,€1993.€€Dr.€Robertson€assigned€no€permanent€impairment€toÏthe€elbow€as€a€result€of€this€event.ÌÌà àIn€October€1993€plaintiff€developed€pain€in€his€shoulder€as€a€result€of€thisÏinjury.€€However,€he€continued€to€work€at€Plumley€until€November€of€1993.€€HeÏthen€voluntarily€left€his€employment€because€his€pain€prevented€him€from€doingÏhis€work.€€However,€he€did€not€advise€Plumley€that€his€resignation€had€anythingÏto€do€with€the€prior€injury.€€He€immediately€went€to€work€for€U.€S.€Tool.€€His€jobÍduties€there€consisted€of€overhead€work,€spray€painting,€welding,€andÏassembling€machinery.€€He€remained€at€U.€S.€Tool€until€February€21,€1994,Ïwhen€he€resigned€because€of€continued€shoulder€pain.€€ÌÌà àIn€February€1994€plaintiff€contacted€the€safety€manager€at€Plumley€andÏrequested€to€see€a€doctor€for€his€elbow.€€He€did€not€advise€the€safety€managerÏor€anyone€else€at€Plumley€that€he€also€claimed€a€shoulder€injury.€€On€FebruaryÏ7,€1994,€plaintiff€saw€Dr.€Terry€Harrison,× ƒ+ ××  ×€complaining€of€pain€and€discomfort€inÏhis€elbow.€€Dr.€Harrisonððs€examination€included€a€manipulation€of€plaintiffððsÏshoulder,€but€resulted€in€no€documented€pain€response.€€His€x„rays€wereÏnegative€and€he€had€good€range€of€motion.€€Dr.€Harrison€understood€thatÏplaintiff€was€still€working€for€Plumley.€€He€did€not€know€plaintiff€had€changedÏjobs.ÌÌà àOn€February€21,€1994,€plaintiff€returned€to€Dr.€Harrison€and€complainedÏfor€the€first€time€of€pain€in€the€right€shoulder,€along€with€tenderness,€decreasedÏrange€of€motion,€and€poor€grip.€€Dr.€Harrison€diagnosed€bursitis.€€Plaintiff€sawÏDr.€Harrison€again€on€March€7,€1994,€complaining€of€increased€pain€andÍdiscomfort€in€the€right€shoulder.€€œBelieving›€that€plaintiff€had€bursitis€with€possibleÏtendinitis€in€the€shoulder,€relating€to€his€degenerative€arthritis,€Dr.€HarrisonÏreferred€him€to€Dr.€Lowell€Stonecipher,€an€orthopedic€surgeon.€€Dr.€HarrisonÏlater€received€a€note€from€Dr.€Stonecipher€reflecting€that€he€had€seen€plaintiffÏon€March€28.€€As€of€that€date,€his€elbow€was€much€better,€but€he€was€stillÏexperiencing€shoulder€problems.€€Dr.€Harrison€did€not€assign€any€permanentÏimpairment€based€on€the€injury.ÌÌà àDr.€Stonecipher€initially€believed€plaintiff€had€tendinitis€in€his€shoulderÏand€tennis€elbow.€€Dr.€Stonecipher€ordered€an€MRI,€which€indicated€findingsÏconsistent€with€either€chronic€inflammatory€changes€of€the€rotator€cuff€or€aÏpartial€tear€of€the€rotator€cuff.ÌÌà àDr.€Stonecipher€referred€plaintiff€to€Dr.€David€L.€Johnson,€an€orthopedicÏsurgeon.€€Plaintiff€was€seen€once€by€Dr.€Johnson€on€April€15,€1994.€€He€agreedÏwith€Dr.€Stonecipherððs€diagnosis€of€chronic€inflammatory€changes€in€the€rotatorÏcuff,€with€a€possible€rotator€cuff€tear,€as€well€as€some€degenerative€jointÏdisease.€€He€recommended€surgical€treatment.€€Dr.€Johnson€testified€byÏdeposition€that€repetitive€activity€at€or€above€the€shoulder€level€was€anÏaggravating€factor€in€plaintiffððs€shoulder€condition.€€He€also€stated€that€the€injuryÏat€Plumley€may€have€had€some€effect€on€his€shoulder.ÌÌà àAt€the€request€of€his€attorney,€plaintiff€was€examined€by€Dr.€Robert€J.ÍBarnett€on€August€29,€1994.€€Dr.€Barnett€testified€by€deposition€that€the€elbowÏand€shoulder€problems€he€saw€were€caused€by€the€August€1993€injury.€€HeÏbelieved€the€injury€aggravated€the€preexisting€arthritic€and€degenerativeÏconditions€in€the€shoulder.€€He€assigned€a€permanent€impairment€rating€ofÏtwenty€(20%)€percent€to€the€arm€or€twelve€(12%)€percent€to€the€body€as€a€whole.€ÏDr.€Barnett€also€was€unaware€that€plaintiff€had€left€Plumley€and€begun€workingÏfor€U.€S.€Tool.€€He€did€not€see€the€1991€x„rays€showing€degenerative€jointÏdisease.€€On€cross„examination€Dr.€Barnett€agreed€that€the€work€at€U.€S.€ToolÏcould€have€contributed€to€plaintiffððs€shoulder€problems.€€He€was€unable€toÏassign€a€percentage€of€impairment€that€existed€before€the€1993€injury.ÌÌà àAt€trial,€plaintiff€testified€that€he€was€unable€to€work€and€was€waiting€forÏadequate€resources€to€have€the€surgery€recommended€by€Dr.€Johnson.ÌÌà àAppellate€review€is€de€novo€upon€the€record€of€the€trial€court,Ïaccompanied€by€a€presumption€of€the€correctness€of€the€findings€of€fact,€unlessÏthe€preponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð50„6„225(e)(2).€€This€tribunal€is€required€to€make€an€independent€examination€of€theÏrecord€to€determine€where€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€lies.€€òòGalloway€v.ÏMemphis€Drum€Serviceóó,€822€S.W.2d€584,€586€(Tenn.€1991);€òòCorcoran€v.€FosterÏAuto€GMC,€Inc.óó,€746€S.W.2d€452,€456€(Tenn.€1988).ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€found€that€plaintiff€was€permanently€impaired€as€a€result€ofÍthe€injury€he€sustained€while€employed€by€Plumley€in€August€1993.€€In€doing€soÏthe€court€made€a€specific€positive€finding€about€plaintiffððs€credibility.€€Where€theÏtrial€judge€has€seen€and€heard€the€witnesses,€especially€where€issues€ofÏcredibility€and€weight€of€oral€testimony€are€involved,€considerable€deferenceÏmust€be€accorded€those€findings€on€review.€€òòLanders€v.€Firemanððs€FundÏInsurance€Companyóó,€775€S.W.2d€355€(Tenn.€1989).€€When€medical€testimonyÏdiffers,€it€is€within€the€discretion€of€the€trial€judge€to€determine€which€expertÏtestimony€to€accept.€€òòHinson€v.€Wal„Mart€Stores,€Inc.óó,€654€S.W.2d€675€(Tenn.Ï1983).ÌÌà àThe€court€further€found€that€although€plaintiff€had€a€pre„existing€condition,Ïit€was€the€work„related€accident€that€created€a€permanent€disability.€€AnÏemployer€takes€an€employee€with€all€pre„existing€conditions€and€cannot€escapeÏliability€when€the€employee,€upon€suffering€a€work„related€injury,€incursÏdisability€far€greater€than€if€he€had€not€had€the€pre„existing€condition.€€òòRogers€v.ÏShawóó,€813€S.W.2d€397€(Tenn.€1991).ÌÌà àThe€court€also€found€that€plaintiff€did€not€suffer€a€compensable€injuryÏwhile€employed€by€U.€S.€Tool,€but€only€an€increase€in€pain.€€Where€workÏaggravates€a€pre„existing€condition€or€injury€merely€by€increasing€pain,€there€isÏno€injury€by€accident.€€òòTownsend€v.€Stateóó,€826€S.W.2d€434€(Tenn.€1992).ÌÌà àThe€evidence€in€this€case€does€not€preponderate€against€any€of€theseÍfindings€made€by€the€trial€judge.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€did€not€address€specifically€the€allegation€ofÏmisrepresentation€by€plaintiff€sufficient€to€bar€his€recovery.€€The€judge€did,Ïhowever,€find€specifically€that€the€plaintiff€was€very€credible.€€We€find€thatÏPlumley/Liberty€Mutual€has€not€carried€its€burden€of€proving€(1)€knowing€andÏwillful€false€representation€as€to€physical€condition;€(2)€reliance€upon€the€falseÏrepresentation€constituting€a€substantial€factor€in€hiring;€and€(3)€causalÏconnection€between€the€false€representation€and€the€on„the„job€injury.€€òòRainesÏv.€Shelby€Williams€Industries,€Inc.óó,€814€S.W.2d€346€(Tenn.€1991).ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€also€did€not€specifically€address€the€issue€of€notice€toÏPlumley.€€There€is€no€dispute€that€plaintiff€gave€timely€notice€of€the€August€8,Ï1993,€accident.€€Plumley/Liberty€Mutual€assert€that€he€is€barred€from€recoveryÏbecause€he€did€not€notify€them€at€that€time€about€a€shoulder€injury.€€However,Ïplaintiffððs€shoulder€injury€did€not€manifest€itself€until€later.€€An€employee€is€notÏrequired€to€supplement€an€initial€notice€with€notice€of€a€later€worseningÏcondition.€€òòQuaker€Oats€Company€v.€Smithóó,€574€S.W.2d€45€(Tenn.€1978).€€ThisÏargument€is€without€merit.ÌÌà àOnce€causation€and€permanency€of€an€injury€have€been€established€byÏexpert€testimony,€the€trial€judge€may€consider€many€pertinent€factors,€includingÏage,€job€skills,€education,€training,€duration€of€disability,€and€job€opportunitiesÍfor€the€disabled,€in€addition€to€anatomical€impairment,€for€the€purpose€ofÏevaluating€the€extent€of€a€claimantððs€permanent€disability.€€òòMcCaleb€v.€SaturnÏCorporationóó,€910€S.W.2d€412€(Tenn.€1995).€€From€our€independent€examinationÏof€the€record€and€consideration€of€the€pertinent€factors,€the€panel€finds€that€theÏevidence€preponderates€against€a€finding€of€fifty€percent€permanent€partialÏimpairment€to€the€body€as€a€whole€as€a€result€of€this€injury,€and€in€favor€of€anÏaward€based€on€thirty€percent€impairment€to€the€body€as€a€whole.€€TheÏjudgment€of€the€trial€court€is€modified€accordingly.ÌÌà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€as€modified.€€The€case€isÏremanded€to€the€trial€court€for€such€further€proceedings,€if€any,€as€may€beÏappropriate.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€jointly€and€severally€to€PlumleyÏCompanies,€Inc.€and€Liberty€Mutual€Insurance€Company.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àCORNELIA€A.€CLARK,€SPECIALÏJUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ______________________________________ÌLYLE€REID,€JUSTICEÌÌÌ______________________________________ÌHEWITT€TOMLIN,€JR.,€SENIOR€JUDGEÌÌ