WPCe # VU:a % 04Y m | 0| 0Dx D3 w 0J 0TC 0^ 0h 0r] 0| 0K 0 1uaU, 0dU,fU*B)DCb( AM0}v~v Bc 0@ AO 0D D/ BHHP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0 ,  AZ"Arial RegularX( 7$` ` TR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalT~| xxxxxx3|xp ((3T6$  7!` TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T   `   0  (#$  0  ****'dxdp Ӏ2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 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)<  9p`(ModernP 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d""""7Border 1dd- --#C << G  !  #d#!    ` \RA'\  !   YYY FILED!X May1,1996CecilCrowson,Jr.!AppellateCourtClerk PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'@Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   eskto Monaco  eskto Monaco  d("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . &  Xd&#  Xd#!    ` \RA'\  p $7XXdd7    L%&#;+'h|` . `LINTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEESPECIALWORKERS'COMPENSATIONPANELKNOXVILLE,JANUARY1996SESSION  ROSSN.EVERETT,   )      ) KNOXCHANCERY Plaintiff/Appellant   )      ) Hon.FrederickD.McDonald,v.      ) Chancellor      ) WALMARTSTORES,INC.,  ) NO.03S019508CH00093       ) Defendant/Appellee  ) FortheAppellant:     FortheAppellees: JamesS.MacDonald    BarryK.MaxwellJenkins&Jenkins     WesleyL.Hatmaker2121PlazaTower     500FirstAmericanCenterKnoxville,TN379292121   P.O.Box2047       Knoxville,TN37901̀  MEMORANDUMOPINIONMembersofPanel: E.RileyAnderson,ChiefJustice,SupremeCourtJohnK.Byers,SeniorJudgeRogerE.Thayer,SpecialJudge  ̀AFFIRMED       THAYER,SpecialJudge Thisworkers'compensationappealhasbeenreferredtotheSpecialWorkers'CompensationAppealsPaneloftheSupremeCourtinaccordancewithTenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(3)forhearingandreportingtotheSupremeCourtoffindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw. Plaintiff,RossN.Everett,hasappealedfromtheactionofthetrialcourtinawarding45%permanentpartialdisabilitybenefitstohisleftleg.HisprimarycontentionistheChancellorwasinerrorbynotfindinghispreexistingarthriticconditionwasaggravatedbytheaccident. Plaintiff,71yearsofageatthetimeofthetrial,wasinjuredonMarch20,1992,whileworkingforthedefendantWalMartStores,Inc.,whenhewasattemptingtohangfishinglures.Hetestifiedheturnedhisfoottomoveandhiskneetwistedcausingtheinjury.HerelatedtothecourtakneeproblempreexistedtheaccidentashehadseenadoctorduringFebruary,1992.Hesaidhewashavingpainandswellinginhisknee,andhewasunabletofullyflexit. TheonlyotherwitnesstotestifywasDr.EdwinE.Holt,anorthopedicsurgeon,whotestifiedbydeposition.Dr.Holtstatedhispreexistingprobleminhiskneewascausedbyarthritis;thatthearthriticconditionwasnotcausedbytheaccidentbuttheaccidentprobablyaggravatedthearthritisbycausingmorepain;thattheaccidentdidnotincreasethearthritis;andthattheaccidentdidcauseameniscaltearwhichhecorrectedbyarthroscopicsurgeryonSeptember12,1992. Dr.Holtgavea14%impairmentratingtotheleftlegasaresultofthemeniscaltearanda10%impairmentratingtothepreexistingarthriticcondition. WedonotbelievetheChancellormisappliedtherulingintheCunninghamv.GoodyearTire&RubberCo.,811S.W.2d888(Tenn.1991)caseasinsistedbytheplaintiff.Althoughaquestionastowhetherplaintiffhadsustainedaninjurybyan"accidentatwork"wasinvolved,thegeneralruleconcerningaggravationofapreexistingconditionwassetforth,therulebeingwhereanemployee'sworkaggravatesapreexistingconditionbymakingthepainworsebutdoesnototherwiseinjureoradvancetheseverityoftheproblem,thereisnocompensableinjurybecauseoftheaggravation. InthelatercaseofTownsendv.State,826S.W.2d434(Tenn.1992),theCourtwasdealingwiththesameissueagainandruledthedeterminativequestionwasnotwhethertherewasanaggravationbutthenatureoftheaggravation.Iftheworkaggravatesapreexistingconditionmerelybyincreasingtheplain,theclaimisnotcompensable.However,iftheseverityoftheconditionisadvanced,orifitresultsinadisablingconditionotherthanincreasedpain,theclaimiscompensable.SeealsoSmithv.Smith'sTransferCorp.,735S.W.2d221(Tenn.1987)whichisinaccord. Fromourreviewofthecase,whichisdenovoaccompaniedbyapresumptionofthecorrectnessofthefindingsoffactunlesswefindthepreponderanceisotherwise,Tenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(2),wedonotfindanyevidenceintherecordtosupportthecontentionplaintiff'sarthriticwasadvancedorresultedinadisablingconditionotherthanincreasedpain.Therefore,weconcludethetrialcourtwascorrectinlimitingthedisabilitytothemeniscaltearwhichwascausedbytheaccident.Wealsofindtheawardof45%tobereasonableundertheevidencesubmitted. PlaintiffalsoassignserrorintheChancellor'srulingthedefendantwouldnotbeliableforthefuturemedicalexpensesofatotalkneereplacementsurgery.Whileourrulingonplaintiff'sprimaryissueprobablydiminishesthisassignment,wenotethatDr.Holtdidtestifythattherewasareasonablechanceofatotalkneereplacementprocedurebeingnecessarybuthewasclearinstatingthisprocedurewasnotduetothemeniscaltearinjury. Findingtheevidencedoesnotpreponderateagainstthetrialcourt'sdecision,thejudgmentisaffirmedwithcostsoftheappealtaxedtoplaintiffandsureties.       򀀀       RogerE.Thayer,SpecialJudgeCONCUR:򀀀E.RileyAnderson,ChiefJustice򀀀JohnK.Byers,SeniorJudge