ÿWPC'  …# VUNa %¯ 0(µ4Ýñ 1m 0dm Ñ w@Ù E 0J 0Te 0^¹ 0h 0r 0|ñ 0†m 0ó 1uƒ U,ø 0d$U,ˆU>´B)ò BDC8 AM{U*È D3ò%f' 0@fÍv~3vÓ± 0„ 0Š 0  0´= 0Çñ 0Û¸ 0ï“ AO‚ÆÑ 0D— D/Û B ˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡z!3|xtuvwxyz#,37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(<1$´´Ô2Ô6.Ú  Ú0Ú  ÚÔ3  Ôà0  à òóEôõEö÷DøDùEúÓ€2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d d%%%%7Border 1dd€-'Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial&&&&'ÿÿdxd øÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÔ€$ÔÝ  ÝÔ€)ÔÔ€)ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€)XÔÌÌò òSeptember€9,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€)ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó \Ñ\R AØ'\Ñ("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò \Ñ\R AØ'\ÑPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA Op Monaco Ò(gfi$µµà0  àÔ2(ÆÔ6.Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ú  Ú0Ú  ÚÔ3  Ôà0` (#(#à(bÕä$¶¶à0  àà0` (#(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  ÚÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` (#` (#à(xâr$··à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0¸ (#¸ (#à(ŒU$¸¸à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0h(#(#à(Ÿ@Æ$¹¹à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  ÚÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0Àh(#h(#à(³ýt$ººà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0À(#À(#à(Çñû$»»à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àà0À(#À(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0p(#(#à€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€##X„d&ÓÑ#€##Xd#ÑÔ€$ÔÝ  Ý›Ò p ÒÒ ° ÒÒ p ÒÒ „ ÒÑ\R AØ'\Ñœò òÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€$ŠÔ›à@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àSPECIAL€WORKERS'€COMPENSATION€€APPEALS€PANELÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌà@ à(October€9,€1995€Session)Ìó óÌßA€& ) °°xdEp§ äAßÌÌCHARLES€E.€CAREY,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌÓ` °‰XNx‘XÓà àPlaintiff„Appellant,à àà àà à)à àà àMADISON€CHANCERYÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àà àÌV.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àà àHon.€Joe€C.€Morris,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àà àChancellorÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌCAROLINA€FREIGHT€CARRIERSà0 à)à0 àà àNo.€€02S01„9506„CH„00050̜ـ€ÙÙ€€ÙßL€(+';+'h|]j` Å `€€Lß›CORPORATION,à àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant„Appellee.à àà à)ÌÌÌÌÌòòFor€Appellant:à àà àà àà àà àà àForÏAppellee:óóÌÌJames€T.€Ryal,€Jr.à àà àà àà àà àà àWilliam€F.€Kendall,€III€€ÌAdams,€Ryal€&€Flippin,€P.C.à àà àà àà àSteven€W.€MaroneyÌHumboldt,€TN€à àà àà àà àà àà àWaldrop€&€Hall,€P.A.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJackson,€TN€ÌÌà@ àÌÌÌÌà@ àòòMEMORANDUM€OPINIONóóÌÌÌÌà@ àÌÌà@ àòòMembers€of€Panel:ÌÌà@ àóóLyle€Reid,€Associate€Justice,€Supreme€CourtÌà@ àJoe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€Special€JudgeÌà@ àJanice€M.€Holder,€Special€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà àAFFIRMED€AS€MODIFIEDà àà àà àà àHolder,€JudgeÌÌÇÑ7€[XXdìXXdì7ÑÓÓà àThis€workers'€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€SpecialÏWorkersðð€Compensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€pursuant€to€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(3)€for€hearing€and€reporting€of€findings€of€fact€andÏconclusions€of€law.Ìà àIn€its€appeal,€the€employer€contends€that€the€evidence€does€not€supportÏthe€trial€courtððs€award€of€seventy€percent€(70%)€to€the€lower€extremity€and€thatÏthe€trial€court€erred€in€computing€the€employeeððs€average€weekly€wage€atÏ$273.00€instead€of€$220.21€per€week.€€The€panel€concludes€that€the€evidenceÏpreponderates€against€the€trial€courtððs€assessment€of€permanent€disability€andÏmodifies€the€award€to€thirty„five€percent€(35%)€to€the€lower€extremity.€€ProperlyÏcomputed,€the€employeeððs€average€weekly€wage€is€$220.21€per€week.Ìà àCharles€E.€Carey€(ð ðCareyðð)€was€injured€on€December€27,€1991,€when€aÏbank€vault€weighing€five€hundred€pounds€fell€off€a€fork€lift€and€struck€the€frontÏpart€of€his€left€thigh.€€He€was€initially€treated€by€Dr.€R.€Michael€Cobb,€anÏorthopedic€surgeon,€who€suspected€a€torn€ligament€in€Careyððs€knee.€€Dr.€CobbÏlater€concluded,€however,€that€the€ligament€was€not€torn€and€that€surgery€wasÏnot€needed.€€In€February,€1992,€Carey€began€to€complain€of€numbness€in€hisÏtoes,€although€Dr.€Cobb€was€unable€to€find€any€indication€of€injury€to€the€sciaticÏnerve,€which€provides€feeling€to€the€toes.€€Carey€was€given€a€note€to€return€toÏwork€on€March€10,€1992.Ì€€à àUpon€examination€on€March€16,€1992,€Careyððs€range€of€motion€wasÏexcellent€and€his€strength€appeared€to€be€normal.€€He€advised€Dr.€Cobb€that€heÏwas€having€no€problem€at€work.€€A€nerve€conduction€study,€performed€as€aÏresult€of€the€complaints€of€toe€numbness,€showed€no€sign€of€injury€to€the€sciaticÍnerve.€€Carey€was€given€no€permanent€physical€anatomical€impairment€and€wasÏdischarged€from€Dr.€Cobbððs€care€on€March€16,€1992.Ìà àWhen€he€returned€to€work€in€March,€Carey€performed€the€same€dutiesÏthat€he€had€performed€before€the€injury,€including€deliveries,€pick„ups€and€dockÏloading€for€outbound€truck€rigs.€€His€supervisors€reported€good€performance.€ÏCarey€did€not€miss€any€additional€work€and€Carey€retired€in€May€1993€for€theÏpurpose€of€maintaining€health€insurance€benefits.Ìà àCarey€was€seen€by€Dr.€Joseph€Boals€for€an€evaluation€on€October€5,Ï1993.€€Dr.€Boals€diagnosed€residuals€from€a€crushing€injury€and€laxity€of€the€leftÏankle.€€An€anatomical€impairment€rating€of€fifteen€percent€(15%)€to€the€left€lowerÏextremity€was€given,€with€Dr.€Boals€finding€that€one€percent€(1%)€of€the€ratingÏwas€probably€due€to€some€degree€of€overlay.Ìà àCarey€was€asked€to€return€to€Dr.€Cobb€in€light€of€Dr.€Boalsðð€findings.€€Dr.ÏCobb€found€no€laxity€in€the€ankle€and€Carey€made€no€complaints€to€him€of€anyÏankle€problems€or€pain.€€Measurements€of€the€circumference€of€both€thighs€andÏcalves€were€equal.€€With€respect€to€Careyððs€complaint€that€his€toes€wereÏparalyzed,€Dr.€Cobb€reflected€in€his€office€notes€that€he€was€ð ðcertain€that€Mr.ÏCarey€is€faking€by€the€observations€made€confirming€that€he€did€have€functionÏof€his€toe€and€ankle€extensors€when€in€fact€he€said€he€could€not€extend€them.ðð€ÏA€claim€of€paralysis,€according€to€Dr.€Cobb,€was€inconsistent€with€the€nature€ofÏthe€injury€received.€€Dr.€Cobbððs€assessment€of€permanent€impairment€was€againÏzero€percent€(0%).€€Ìà àCarey€is€59€years€old€with€a€sixth€grade€education€and€a€GED.€€HisÏexperience€included€two€years€of€service€in€the€Army,€where€he€received€trainingÍin€communications,€two€years€of€insurance€sales,€and€general€farm€work.€€TheÏmajority€of€his€experience,€however,€totaling€approximately€twenty„five€(25)Ïyears,€was€in€the€trucking€industry.€€His€duties€as€a€truck€driver€included€makingÏpickups€and€deliveries€and€working€the€loading€docks.€€At€the€time€of€his€injury,Ïhe€was€working€for€both€the€defendant€and€another€trucking€company€on€aÏpart„€time€basis.€€As€a€part„time€employee€for€Carolina,€he€worked€between€twoÏ(2)€andÑ€,ÑÇfive€(5)€days€a€week€at€an€hourly€rate€of€$13.55.€Ìà àMuch€of€the€testimony€at€trial€concerned€Careyððs€employment€status€atÏthe€time€of€the€injury.€€He€contended€that€he€had€recently€begun€working€as€aÏð ðprobationaryðð€employee€and€had€been€promised€by€his€supervisor€that€if€theÏthirty€(30)€day€probationary€period€were€successfully€completed,€he€would€beÏhired€as€a€full„time€employee.€€The€defendant€contended€that€Carey€was€at€allÏtimes€a€casual,€or€part„time,€employee€and€denied€that€any€promises€were€madeÏconcerning€full„time€employment.€€Ìà àThe€trial€court€awarded€benefits€based€on€an€average€weekly€wage€ofÏ$273.00€per€week,€based€on€his€hourly€rate€multiplied€by€a€forty€(40)€hour€workÏweek,€and€found€him€to€have€a€seventy€percent€(70%)€vocational€disability.ÌÌà@ àVOCATIONAL€DISABILITY€RATINGÌà àOur€scope€of€review€of€findings€of€fact€by€the€trial€court€is€òòde€novoóó€uponÏthe€record€of€the€trial€court,€accompanied€by€a€presumption€of€correctness,€unlessÏthe€preponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225Ï(e)(2).€€ð ðThis€standard€differs€from€that€previously€provided€and€requires€thisÏCourt€to€weigh€in€more€depth€factual€findings€and€conclusions€of€trial€judges€inÏworkersðð€compensation€cases.ðð€òòHumphrey€v.€David€œWitherspoon›,€Inc.óó,€734ÏœS.W.2d›€315€(Tenn.€1987).Ìà àWhere€the€trial€judge€has€seen€and€heard€witnesses,€the€trial€judge€is€givenÏconsiderable€deference€on€matters€of€credibility€and€the€weight€of€oral€testimonyÏon€review.€€òòId.óó€€This€panel,€however,€is€able€to€make€its€own€independentÏassessment€of€the€medical€proof€to€determine€where€the€preponderance€of€theÍevidence€lies€when€the€medical€testimony€is€presented€by€deposition€as€it€was€inÏthis€case.€€òòœHenson›€v.€City€of€œLawrenceburg›óó,€851€œS.W.2d›€809,€812€(Tenn.€1993).€Ìà àDr.€œBoals›€examined€Carey€on€only€one€occasion.€€A€portion€of€hisÏassessment€of€permanent€partial€disability€acknowledged€possible€overlay.€€Dr.ÏCobb€treated€and€evaluated€Carey€both€before€and€after€Dr.€œBoals›ðð€assessmentÏand€found€that€Careyððs€subjective€complaints€could€not€be€supported.€€Ìà àWeighing€Dr.€Cobbððs€testimony€against€that€of€Dr.€œBoals›,€this€panel€isÏpersuaded€that€insufficient€weight€was€given€by€the€trial€court€to€the€testimonyÏof€Dr.€Cobb€and€finds€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trial€courtððsÏassessment€of€seventy€percent€(70%)€permanent€partial€disability.€€ConsideringÏall€of€the€relevant€facts€and€circumstances€in€this€case,€this€panel€finds€that€aÏpreponderance€of€the€evidence€supports€a€finding€that€Mr.€Carey€sustained€aÏthirty„five€percent€(35%)€€permanent€disability€to€the€left€lower€extremity.€€Ìà àThe€finding€of€permanent€disability€by€the€trial€court€is€accordinglyÏmodified.ÌÌà@ àAVERAGE€WEEKLY€WAGEÌà àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„102€provides€as€follows:Ìà8 àÓÓà8 à(a)(1)€(A)€"Average€weekly€wages"€means€theÏearnings€of€the€injured€employee€in€the€employmentÏin€which€the€injured€employee€was€working€at€theÏtime€of€the€injury€during€the€period€of€fifty„two€(52)Ïweeks€immediately€preceding€the€date€of€the€injuryÏdivided€by€fifty„two€(52);€*€*€*ÌÌà8 àà8 à(B)€Where€the€employment€prior€to€the€injuryÏextended€over€a€period€of€less€than€fifty„two€(52)Ïweeks,€the€method€of€dividing€the€earnings€duringÏthat€period€by€the€number€of€weeks€and€parts€thereofÍduring€which€the€employee€earned€wages€shall€beÏfollowed;€provided,€that€results€just€and€fair€to€bothÏparties€will€thereby€be€obtained;€ÌÓÓÌà àCarey€lost€his€previous€employment€in€1991€and€was€injured€while€in€theÏemploy€of€the€defendant€in€1991.€€He€worked€less€than€fifty„two€(52)€weeksÏimmediately€preceding€the€date€of€the€injury.€€It€is€not€disputed€that€if€CareyððsÏactual€earnings€were€divided€by€the€number€of€weeks€that€he€actually€worked,Ïhis€average€weekly€wage€would€be€$220.21,€not€$273.00.€Ìà àThe€average€weekly€wage€of€a€worker€must€be€determined€by€pastÏearnings€and€not€by€what€the€worker€may€earn€in€the€future.€€òòArmstrong€v.ÏSpearsóó,€393€œS.W.2d›€729,€733€(Tenn.€1965).€€What€a€person€would€work€ifÏallowed€or€if€"he€had€felt€like€it"€is€not€considered€in€determining€the€actualÏaverage€weekly€wage€of€an€employee.€€òòœMcKinney›€v.€Feldspar€Corp.óó,€612€œS.W.2d›Ï157,€160€(Tenn.€1981).€€€Ìà àEven€if€we€were€to€resolve€the€issue€of€probationary€status€in€favor€of€theÏclaimant,€it€would€be€insufficient€to€support€the€trial€judgeððs€computation€of€theÏaverage€weekly€wage.€€If,€as€the€statute€states,€the€average€weekly€wage€must€beÏcomputed€by€using€actual€earnings,€a€promise€alone€of€additional€hours€cannotÏbe€used€to€increase€the€average€weekly€wage.€€Moreover,€the€promise€itself€wasÏconditional.€€In€the€words€of€Carey,€only€if€he€worked€thirty€(30)€days€and€didnððtÏhave€ð ðany€problems€and€no€accidents€or€anythingðð€would€he€go€on€regularÏstatus.Ìà àThe€claimant€contends€that€this€construction€of€the€statute€does€notÏprovide€results€that€are€ð ðjust€and€fair€to€both€partiesðð€as€required€by€the€statute.€ÍNothing€in€the€record€suggests€that€fairness€is€not€achieved€under€the€facts€inÏthis€case€by€dividing€Careyððs€actual€earnings€by€the€number€of€weeks€that€heÏworked.à à€The€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€modified€accordingly€and€theÏcase€is€remanded€for€such€further€proceedings€as€may€be€needed€to€enforce€theÏjudgment€as€modified,€as€well€as€for€the€collection€of€costs.€€Costs€on€appeal€areÏtaxed€to€the€plaintiff„appellee.Ìà àà àà à€ÏÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà à_____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àJanice€M.€Holder,€JudgeÌÓỚ̜Ñ€.ÑÇCONCUR:ÌÓÓÌ________________________________ÌLyle€œReid›,€Associate€JusticeÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌJoe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€Special€œJudgeÓÓ›