ÿWPC• …# VU:a %› 0û¡w@œ 4Ü ð ÿ  0J 0TW 0^« 0h 0rq 0|ã 0†_ 0å 1uu 0dêU*NB)xDC¡ AMä B1¨NU6öv~,vÓª D3} 0@° AOðÆ? 0D D/I Bx˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 , øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX(Óý,$¡¡Ñ  ÑÒH°ÒÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÔ€XûXXXÔÑ7€>‚XXdðXXdð7Ñ ©ª«D¬P­D®¯°±D²Ó€·‚^!x3|x½HI2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d""""7Border 1dd€-#Cþÿ << Gÿÿ d žÝ ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€!ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ H ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÝ  ÝÔ€!ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€!XÔÌÌò òDecemberÏ19,Ï1996ÌÌCecilÏCrowson,ÏJr.ÌÔ€!ôÔAppellateÏCourtÏClerkó ó< Œ 9p`(Courier NewPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€!ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ H ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÝ  Ý›ò òÓ  ÓÞ ÞÌIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEE̜ـ€ÙßR€$&#A1-j|` à. `€€@ÿRß›SPECIAL€WORKERSðð€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELÌKNOXVILLE,€JULY€1996€SESSIONÌÓ  ÓÌÌÌÌÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ° Òó óWESLEY€EDDINS,€SR.,à àà àà à)à àWASHINGTON€CHANCERYÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appelleeà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€J.€RICHARD€JOHNSON,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àCHANCELLORÌNORTH€AMERICAN€RAYON€à àà à)ÌCORPORATION,à àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNO.€€œ03S01„9602„CH„00016›Ìà àDefendant/Appellantà àà à)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌò òòòFor€the€Appellants:à àà àà àFor€the€Appellee:ÌÌó óóóW.€Shawn€McDanielà àà àà àHowell€H.€Sherrod,€Jr.ÌThe€Anderson€Firmà àà àà àà à249€East€Main€StreetÌ415€Broad€Streetà àà àà àà àJohnson€City,€TN€37604„5707ÌP.€O.€Box€Drawer€88ÌKingsport,€TN€37662„0088ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌò òòòÓ  ÓM€E€M€O€R€A€N€D€U€M€€€O€P€I€N€I€O€NÌÌÌÌMembers€of€Panel:ÌÌó óóóÌPenny€J.€White,€JusticeÌRoger€E.€Thayer,€Special€JudgeÌJoe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€Special€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌò òÓ  ÓAFFIRMED.à àà àà àà àà àà àà àTHAYER,ÏSpecial€Judgeó óÌÌÓÓà àThis€workers'€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€SpecialÏÑ  ÑWorkers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€in€accordanceÏwith€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(3)€for€hearing€and€reporting€to€theÏSupreme€Court€of€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.€Ìà àThe€employer,€North€American€Rayon€Corporation,€has€appealed€fromÏthe€trial€courtððs€award€of€permanent€disability€benefits€to€plaintiff,€WesleyÏEddins,€Sr.€€The€Chancellor€fixed€the€award€at€45%€to€the€body€as€a€whole.Ìà àTwo€issues€are€presented€on€appeal.€€First,€the€employer€contends€theÏtrial€court€was€in€error€in€allowing€temporary€total€disability€benefits.€€Second,€itÏis€argued€plaintiff€did€not€incur€any€permanent€disability€as€a€result€of€theÏalleged€work„related€injury.Ìà àPlaintiff€is€29€years€of€age€and€is€a€high€school€graduate.€€He€has€beenÏgoing€to€college€for€about€two€years€attempting€to€rehabilitate€himself€for€otherÏtypes€of€employment.€€His€college€work€would€classify€him€as€a€sophomore.€€OnÍabout€October€11,€1991,€he€was€injured€while€at€his€work€station€when€the€floorÏgave€away€causing€him€to€fall€some€distance€below.€€He€said€the€fall€injured€hisÏback€and€he€had€immediate€pain€up€and€down€his€spinal€cord€and€pain€in€hisÏneck€and€legs.Ìà àHe€continued€to€work€for€about€two€weeks€until€his€condition€becameÏworse;€at€one€point,€he€testified,€he€could€not€move€his€legs;€the€company€doctorÏtook€him€off€work€duties€on€about€November€8,€1991,€and€he€had€not€returned€toÏwork€as€of€the€date€of€the€trial€on€September€25,€1995;€his€chief€complaint€hasÏbeen€massive€muscle€spasms;€he€told€the€court€his€condition€did€not€improveÏmuch€until€August„September€1994.Ìà àThe€record€indicates€he€has€seen€many€doctors,€some€have€testifiedÏextensively€in€this€proceeding€and€others€appear€in€the€record€by€medicalÏreports,€letters,€etc.,€identified€as€collective€exhibit€#1.Ìà àThe€review€of€the€case€is€òòde€novoóó€accompanied€by€a€presumption€of€theÏcorrectness€of€the€findings€of€fact€unless€we€find€the€preponderance€isÏotherwise.€€T.C.A.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(2).Ìà àIn€connection€with€the€issue€concerning€temporary€total€disabilityÏbenefits,€the€trial€court€allowed€benefits€to€run€until€January€28,€1993.€€TheÏemployer€contends€these€benefits€should€have€terminated€on€February€10,Ï1992.€€In€saying€the€evidence€preponderates€against€this€finding,€the€employerÏcites€the€medical€record€of€Dr.€Jerry€Gastineau,€one€of€the€first€company€doctorsÏto€see€and€treat€œplaintiff.€›€Dr.€Gastineau€released€plaintiff€to€return€to€work€onÍFebruary€10,€1992,€finding€he€had€reached€maximum€improvement€and€alsoÏfinding€there€was€no€evidence€of€impairment€or€disability.Ìà àConflicting€with€this€opinion€is€the€deposition€testimony€of€Dr.€Wayne€M.ÏWoodbury€who€first€saw€plaintiff€during€October€1994.€€Dr.€Woodbury€testified€heÏreached€maximum€medical€improvement€during€January€1993.€€Also,€collectiveÏexhibit€#1€contains€a€letter€dated€January€21,€1992,€from€Dr.€Fred€R.ÏKnickerbocker€to€the€insurance€company€saying€the€employee€had€not€reachedÏmaximum€medical€improvement.Ìà àFrom€our€review€of€the€record,€we€do€not€find€the€evidence€toÏpreponderate€against€the€trial€judgeððs€finding€on€this€point.Ìà àThe€employer€insists€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trialÏjudgeððs€finding€of€permanent€disability.€€There€is€conflicting€evidence€on€thisÏquestion€also.Ìà àDr.€Dennis€M.€Aguirre,€an€anesthesiologist€with€a€subspecialty€in€acuteÏand€chronic€pain€management,€testified€by€deposition.€€He€first€saw€plaintiffÏduring€June€1993€and€found€intense€muscle€spasms;€he€said€plaintiff€has€aÏvalid€back€œdysfunction›€as€a€result€of€the€accident€and€there€was€medicalÏimpairment;€he€did€not€give€a€medical€rating€but€left€that€to€the€determination€ofÏother€physicians;€he€did€not€continue€other€testing€and/or€treatments€as€plaintiffÏsaid€he€could€not€financially€afford€same.Ìà àDr.€Wayne€M.€Woodbury€testified€by€deposition.€€He€is€a€physicianÏspecializing€in€physical€medicine€and€rehabilitation;€he€first€saw€plaintiff€duringÏOctober€1994€and€testified€his€range€of€motion€was€extremely€limited,€that€heÍwalked€with€difficulty;€he€was€of€the€opinion€his€chronic€back€pain€wouldÏcontinue;€he€said€he€had€an€impairment€but€did€not€give€a€rating.Ìà àDr.€Sheng€Tchou,€a€specialist€in€physical€medicine€and€rehabilitation,Ïtestified€by€deposition.€€He€examined€plaintiff€on€November€11,€1994€for€theÏsole€purpose€of€determining€an€impairment€rating;€he€found€muscle€spasms€onÏboth€sides€of€his€lower€back€and€gave€a€22%€medical€impairment;€he€saidÏplaintiff€should€be€restricted€from€activities€requiring€frequent€bending,€stooping,Ïtwisting,€prolonged€standing€or€lifting€more€than€ten€pounds;€he€stated€plaintiffÏcould€not€return€to€his€work€with€defendant€but€should€re„educate€himself€orÏseek€vocational€training€in€order€to€find€other€employment.Ìà àDr.€Norman€Hankins,€a€vocational€rehabilitation€witness,€testified€byÏdeposition€and€was€of€the€opinion€plaintiff€had€an€81%€vocational€disability.Ìà àDr.€Freeman€E.€Broadwell,€a€physician€of€physical€medicine€andÏrehabilitation,€testified€by€deposition.€€He€first€saw€plaintiff€early€in€the€course€ofÏevents€on€January€1,€1992,€upon€referral€by€one€of€the€company€doctors;€heÏsaid€x„rays€showed€no€fractures,€etc.;€a€CT€scan€showed€mild€bulging€disc€atÏL4„5€level€and€silent€bulge€at€L5„S1€level;€he€did€not€detect€any€muscle€spasm;Ïand€his€diagnosis€was€low€back€strain€with€no€impairment.Ìà àDr.€John€Marshall,€a€physician€of€physical€medicine€and€rehabilitation,Ïtestified€by€deposition.€€He€first€saw€plaintiff€a€few€days€before€the€trial€duringÏSeptember€1995,€for€the€purpose€of€an€independent€examination.€€He€found€noÏimpairment.Ìà àThe€above€is€a€short€summary€of€all€expert€witnesses€who€testified€in€thisÏproceeding.€€Collective€exhibit€#1€contains€reports,€office€œnoteÔ% € Ôs,›€letters,€etc.€fromÏother€doctors€who€found€no€impairment.Ìà àAlthough€our€review€is€òòde€novoóó,€the€question€before€us€is€whether€theÏevidence€preponderates€against€the€findings€of€the€trial€court.€€It€has€often€beenÏstated€in€cases€of€this€nature€that€the€trial€court€must€decide€which€medicalÏtestimony€to€accept€where€the€evidence€is€conflicting.€€In€making€that€decision,Ïthe€court€may€consider€the€qualifications€of€the€experts,€the€circumstances€ofÏtheir€examination,€the€information€available€to€them€and€the€evaluation€of€theÏimportance€of€that€information€by€other€experts.€€òòOrman€v.€Williams„Sonoma,ÏIncóó.,€803€S.W.2d€672,€676€(Tenn.€1991).Ìà àGenerally,€the€trial€court€is€in€a€better€position€to€judge€credibilityÏquestions€where€oral€testimony€is€involved€but€deposition€testimony€can€beÏreviewed€by€the€appellate€court€in€the€same€manner€as€the€trial€court.€€òòLandersÏv.€Firemanððs€Fund,€Inc.óó,€775€S.W.2d€355,€356€(Tenn.€1989).Ìà àThe€trial€court€and€three€expert€medical€witnesses€judged€plaintiffððsÏcredibility€concerning€his€numerous€complaints€of€pain,€etc.€during€his€longÏinterval€of€non„employment€and€resolved€the€issue€in€his€favor.€€In€reviewingÏand€weighing€all€of€the€opposing€evidence,€we€cannot€conclude€itÏpreponderates€against€the€evidence€the€court€accepted.Ìà àTherefore,€the€judgment€entered€by€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€of€theÏappeal€are€taxed€to€the€defendant„employer€and€sureties.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àRoger€E.€Thayer,€Special€JudgeÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌPenny€J.€White,€JusticeÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌJoe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€Special€JudgeÌà àœÇÔ€'ÔÌà@ àà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€KNOXVILLEÌÌÌWESLEY€EDDINS,€SR.,à à€€€€à àà à)à àWashington€Chancery€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€29818Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€J.€Richard€JohnsonÌV.à àà àà àà àà àà à)€€€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)€€à àS.€Ct.€No.€03„S„01„9602„CH„0016ÌNORTH€AMERICAN€RAYON€€€€€€€€€€)ÌCORPORATION,à àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellant.à à)à àAffirmed.ÌÓÓÌÌà@ àòòJUDGMENT€ORDERóóÌÌà àà àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€motion€forÏreview€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(5)(B),€theÏentire€record,€including€the€order€of€referral€to€the€SpecialÏWorkers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel,€and€the€Panel'sÏMemorandum€Opinion€setting€forth€its€findings€of€fact€andÏconclusions€of€law,€which€are€incorporated€herein€byÏreference;ÌÌà àà àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€motionÏfor€review€is€not€well„taken€and€should€be€denied;€andÌÌà àà àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Panel's€findingsÏof€fact€and€conclusions€of€law€are€adopted€and€affirmed,€andÏthe€decision€of€the€Panel€is€made€the€judgment€of€the€Court.ÌÌà àà àCost€will€be€paid€by€Defendant/Appellant,€and€theirÏsurety,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÌà àà àIt€is€so€ordered€this€____€day€of€_____________,Ï1996.ÌÔ US ÔÓ ` °œXÓÔ€!ÔÔ US Ô›