ÿWPC¸) ÆU1Bä %& U ., rZ 0Ì Yni 0rmßw@ß4Æ3ÆùƿƅÆK 0J 0T[ 0^¯ 0h  0ru 0|ç 0†c 0é 1uy 0dî BRo$ˆB)¬DCÕ D3 AOK)š 0@à 0K fN v~´ vÓ2" D+( AO0( 0D( D/Ã( Bò( A©)ô\  `*Times New RomanTTô"ÝÆÿA€ArialTT'    0 .   (e2¹þ$©©Ý ƒ ,…!ÝÔ€XßÎXôôÔÔ€X8 XXXßÎÔÓ  ÓÝ  Ý3|x(«ô\  `*Times New RomanTTôôCô\  PŽ6QôP"ÝÆÿA€ArialTTomanTTXXaÝÆÿptQXpô\  `*Times New RomanTT¼¼^ô\  PŽ6Q¼Pô\  `*Times New RomanTT,,)ô\  PŽ6Q,Pô\  `*Times New RomanTTXXPô\  PŽ6QXPô\  `*Times New RomanTT6ô\  PŽ6QP(J,…$¡¡Ô€X„'XôôÔÔ€XÞâXXX„'ÔÓ  Ó EEEEEDDDDÓ€·‚^!(hÀpLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ d Ý ƒ !ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ôÔÔ€XÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ 8 ÒÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ@  ÔÚ  ÚÚ  ÚÔA  ÔÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓ Ý ƒ !ÝÑ  ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ôÔÔ€XÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ 8 ÒÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ@  ÔÚ  ÚÚ  ÚÔA  ÔÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓ% Line 7 d((((7Border 1dd%%%%'ÿÿdxd-.)Cþÿ << Gÿÿ Ý ƒ !ÝÑ  ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ôÔÔ€XÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌò òMarch€4,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó \Ñ\R AØ'\ÑPtPtHHøHÿöÿòV,(ühhØ hd'0ÿÎÿºF ® Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò'ÈÈÈÈdxd-‚ƒCþÿ<< Cÿÿ($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd-.:›&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ !ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÔ€ôÔÔ€XÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÑ\R AØ'\ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ 8 ÒÖ€&ÖÑ  ÑÔ&  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÖ€'ÖÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€¼ÔÔ€ÔIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌSPECIAL€WORKERS'€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELÌÙ€ÙßR€+,)A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRßÌAT€KNOXVILLEÌ(December€3,€1996€Session)ÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓWILBUR€E.€CAGLE,€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€,Ô€Ô€¼Ô€€€€€)€€€€KNOX€CIRCUITÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€XÔ€Ô€¼Ô€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Plaintiff„Appellee,€€€€Ô€,Ô€Ô€¼Ô€€Ô€ôÔ€Ô€¼Ô€)€€€€€Hon.€Dale€Workman,Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€Ô€Ô€¼Ô€€€€Ô€,Ô€Ô€¼Ô€)€€€€€Judge.Ìv.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€XÔ€Ô€¼Ô€€Ô€Ô€Ô€¼Ô€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€ôÔ€Ô€¼Ô€€€€Ô€ôÔ€Ô€¼Ô€€)€€€€€No.€03S01„9605„CV„00057ÌMIKE€UNDERWOOD€BUILDERS,€€Ô€,Ô€Ô€¼Ô€€€)ÌINC.€and€MIKE€UNDERWOOD,€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€Ô€Ô€¼Ô€Ô€XÔ€Ô€,Ô€Ô€¼Ô€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Defendant„Appellant.€€Ô€Ô€Ô€ôÔ€Ô€¼Ô€€€€)ÌÌÌÌòòFor€Appellantóó:€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€òòFor€Appellee:óóÌÌWade€M.€Boswell€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€James€R.€LafevorÌWilliam€T.€Magill€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Knoxville,€TennesseeÌO'Connor,€Petty,€Child€&€BoswellÌKnoxville,€TennesseeòòÌóóÌÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓÌÌòòM€E€M€O€R€A€N€D€U€M€€€€O€P€I€N€I€O€NóóÌMailed:€January€27,€1997ÌÌÌÌòòMembers€of€Panelóó:ÌÌE.€Riley€Anderson,€Associate€Justice,€Supreme€CourtÌRoger€E.€Thayer,€Special€JudgeÌJoe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€Special€JudgeÌÌÔ'  ÔÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓÌÓ  ÓAFFIRMED€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Loser,ÏJudgeÓ ¹ ÓÌòòÓ€ÓÓ H¡ÓÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓMEMORANDUM€OPINIONóóÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓà àà àThis€workers'€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€theÏSpecial€Workers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€inÏaccordance€with€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€section€50„6„225(e)(3)€for€hearing€andÏreporting€of€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.€€In€this€appeal,€theÏemployer,€Underwood,€contends€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trialÏcourt's€findings€that€(1)€the€employee's€injury€was€one€arising€out€of€and€inÏthe€course€of€employment,€(2)€the€employer€had€actual€notice€of€the€injury,Ïand€(3)€the€employee€retains€a€forty€percent€permanent€partial€disability€toÏthe€right€leg€from€a€torn€meniscus.€€The€panel€has€concluded€the€judgmentÏshould€be€affirmed.Ìà àà àThe€employee€or€claimant,€Cagle,€is€forty„eight€years€old€andÏhas€a€ninth€grade€education.€€He€has€worked€primarily€in€construction€and€asÏa€machine€operator€in€a€factory.€€His€duties€with€Underwood€includeÏperforming€repairs€on€new€houses€during€the€first€year€after€they€are€sold,Ïbut€not€home€maintenance.€€His€normal€working€hours€are€from€8:30€a.m.Ïuntil€4:30€p.m.,€but€he€often€works€later.€€He€is€paid€a€salary€rather€thanÏwages.Ìà àà àOn€September€29,€1993,€Underwood€left€the€work€site€at€4:00Íp.m.,€instructing€the€claimant€to€"lock€up"€when€he€left.€€The€claimant€wentÏto€one€of€the€houses€to€check€mortar€joints€and,€as€he€was€about€to€leave,ÏSuzanne€Chandler,€who€had€purchased€one€of€the€employer's€houses€in€AprilÏof€the€same€year,€asked€to€borrow€some€WD„40.€€Although€it€was€afterÏnormal€hours,€the€claimant€offered€to€spray€Ms.€Chandler's€squeaky€door.€ÏWhile€doing€so,€Cagle€slipped€and€fell,€injuring€his€knee.€€He€had€to€call€hisÏwife€to€come€and€drive€him€home.Ìà àà àTwo€months€earlier,€the€claimant€had€slipped€and€slightlyÏinjured€his€knee€while€performing€a€repair€at€the€Chandler€home,€but€theÏinjury€was€so€slight€that€he€did€not€lose€time€or€require€medical€attention.€ÏHe€did€not€report€that€occurrence.€€The€record€is€clear€that€the€employerÏhad€actual€knowledge€of€the€accident€which€is€the€basis€of€this€workers'Ïcompensation€claim.Ìà àà àThe€treating€physician,€an€orthopedic€surgeon,€diagnosed€aÏcomplex€bucket€handle€tear€of€the€lateral€meniscus€and€probableÏexacerbation€of€pre„existing€arthritic€disease,€caused€by€the€occurrence€ofÏSeptember€29th.€€He€assigned€a€permanent€impairment€rating€of€twentyÏpercent€to€the€injured€knee,€using€appropriate€guidelines.€€Almost€all€of€theÏdamaged€meniscus€was€surgically€removed.€€The€claimant€returned€to€workÏwithout€restrictions€on€November€29th€wearing€a€brace,€but€continues€toÏhave€pain€and€swelling.Ìà àà àThe€trial€court€awarded,€among€other€things,€permanent€partialÏdisability€benefits€based€on€forty€percent€to€the€leg.€€Appellate€review€is€deÏnovo€upon€the€record€of€the€trial€court,€accompanied€by€a€presumption€ofÏcorrectness€of€the€findings€of€the€trial€court,€unless€the€preponderance€of€theÏevidence€is€otherwise.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€section€50„6„225(e)(2).Ìà àà àAn€accidental€injury€arises€out€of€one's€employment€when€thereÏis€apparent€to€the€rational€mind,€upon€a€consideration€of€all€theÏcircumstances,€a€causal€connection€between€the€conditions€under€which€theÏwork€is€required€to€be€performed€and€the€resulting€injury,€and€occurs€in€theÏcourse€of€one's€employment€if€it€occurs€while€an€employee€is€performing€aÏduty€he€was€employed€to€do.€€òòFink€v.€Caudleóó,€856€€S.W.2d€€952€(Tenn.Ï1993).€€The€trial€judge€rejected€the€employer's€argument€that€this€injury€wasÏnot€covered€because€it€occurred€after€normal€working€hours€and€because€theÏoiling€of€a€squeaking€door€is€maintenance€not€repair,€and€resolved€the€issueÏin€favor€of€the€employee.€€The€evidence€fails€to€preponderate€against€theÏfinding€of€the€trial€judge.Ìà àà àWhere€the€employer€denies€that€a€claimant€has€given€the€writtenÏnotice€required€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€section€50„6„201,€the€claimant€has€theÏburden€of€showing€that€the€employer€had€actual€notice,€or€that€the€employeeÏhas€either€complied€with€the€requirement€or€has€a€reasonable€excuse€for€hisÏfailure€to€do€so,€for€notice€is€an€essential€element€of€his€claim.€€òòMasters€v.ÏIndustrial€Garments€Mfg.€Co.óó,€595€€S.W.2d€€811€(Tenn.€1980).€€We€areÏaware€of€no€rule€which€requires€a€worker€to€give€notice€of€an€accident€notÏcausing€disability€or€requiring€medical€attention€as€a€condition€precedent€toÏthe€assertion€of€a€claim€for€benefits€for€a€later€injury.€€Moreover,€theÏevidence€fails€to€preponderate€against€the€trial€judge's€finding€that€theÏemployer€had€actual€knowledge€of€the€September€29th€injury.Ìà àà àOnce€the€causation€and€permanency€of€an€injury€have€beenÏestablished€by€expert€medical€testimony,€the€trial€judge€may€consider€manyÏpertinent€factors,€including€age,€job€skills,€education,€training,€duration€ofÏdisability€and€job€opportunities€for€the€disabled,€in€addition€to€anatomicalÍimpairment,€for€the€purpose€of€evaluating€the€extent€of€a€claimant'sÏpermanent€disability.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€section€50„6„241(a)(2).€€From€ourÏindependent€examination€of€the€record,€we€find€the€evidence€fails€toÏpreponderate€against€the€trial€judge's€finding€with€respect€to€permanentÏdisability.Ìà àà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€accordingly€affirmed€and€theÏcause€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€such€further€proceedings,€if€any,€asÏmay€be€appropriate.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€defendant„appellant.Ó *bÓÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓ_______________________________Ó ÓÌÓ  Ó€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Joe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€JudgeÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌE.€Riley€Anderson,€Associate€JusticeÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌRoger€E.€Thayer,€JudgeÌÑ€/ÑÇÒ  ÒÒ 8 Òà àà àà àÌà àà àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌ€€€€€€ÓÓà à€à à€€€€€€€€€AT€KNOXVILLEÌÌÌÌÒ S ÒÒ 8 ÒWILBUR€E.€CAGLE,€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à à)€€€€KNOX€CIRCUITÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)€€€€€NO.1„397„94€€€€€€€à à€€€€€€à àÏà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà à€€€€€€€€€€€)à à€à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€)à àHon.€Dale€Workman€à àÌvs.à àà àà àà àà àà à€)à àCircuitÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€)à àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€)à à03S01„9605„CV„00057ÌMIKE€UNDERWOODBUILDER,€€€€€€)à à€ÌINC.€AND€MIKE€UNDERWOOD,à à€)à àà àà à€Ìà àà àà à€à àà àà à€)à àà àà àà àà à€Ìà à€Defendant/Appellant.à à€à à€)à àà àà àà à€Ô€îÔÌÌÓffÓà àà àà à€€€€€€€€€€€òòJUDGMENT€ORDERóóÌÌà àà àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€the€entire€record,Ïincluding€the€order€of€referral€to€the€Special€Workerðð€CompensationÏPanel,€and€the€Panelððs€Memorandum€Opinion€setting€forth€its€findingsÏof€fact€and€conclusions€of€law,€which€are€incorporated€herein€byÏreference;Ìà àÌà àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€MemorandumÏOpinion€of€the€Panel€should€be€accepted€and€approved€;€andÌÌà àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Panelððs€findings€of€act€andÏconclusions€of€law€are€adopted€and€affirmed,€and€the€decision€of€theÏPanel€is€made€the€Judgment€of€the€Court.ÌÌà àCosts€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€defendent/appellant€and€surety,€€Ïfor€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.€€Ì€Ì03/04/97à àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌÌÌÔ€XÔà àÔ€¼Ô