ÿWPC” …# VU:a %› 0û¡w@œ 4Ü ð 0Jÿ I 0TQ ¥ 0^« 0h 0rq 0|ã 0†_ 0å 1uu 0dêU*NB)xDC¡ AMä§1U6Øv~ BŒvÓ© D3| 0@¯ AOïÆ> 0D D/H Bw˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 , øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX(Óý,$¡¡Ñ  ÑÒH°ÒÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÔ€XûXXXÔÑ7€>‚XXdðXXdð7Ñ éUêUëUìUíUîUïDðUñÓ€ý©U!3|xÿ2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔH2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d7Border 1dd€- Cþÿ << Gÿÿ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ H ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌò òOctoberÏ17,Ï1996ÌÌCecilÏCrowson,ÏJr.ÌÔ€ôÔAppellateÏCourtÏClerkó ó< Œ 9p`(Courier NewPtPtHPð€ÿÜÿìô”(üHPð€P € €' dStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Geneva ÒÒ  BA Op Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££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  ÝÓ  ÓÓ` °ŒX±!(#XÓò ò›Ô% € ÔIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌSPECIAL€WORKERSðð€COMPENSATION€APPEALSÏPANELÌKNOXVILLE,€JULY€1996€SESSIONÌÙ€€ÙÓ  ÓœßL€!" ;+'h|` à. `€€Lß›ÌÌÌÌÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ° Òó óBILLY€GIBSON,à àà àà àà à)à àœSEVIER›ÏCIRCUITÌà 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.€BENÏW.€HOOPER,€II,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àCIRCUITÏJUDGEÌœAETNA›€CASUALTY€AND€SURETY€CO.à à)Ìand€WOLF€TREE€EXPERTS,€INC.,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNO.€Ï03S01„9602„CV€€„00012Ìà àDefendants/Appellantsà àà à)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌò òòòFor€the€Appellants:à àà àà àFor€theÏAppellee:ÌÌó óóóDavid€E.€Smithà àà àà àà àDwight€E.€StokesÌœHodges›,€Doughty€&€Carsonà àà à119€Court€AvenueÌ617€West€Main€Streetà àà àà àœSevierville›,€TN€37862ÌP.€O.€Box€869ÌKnoxville,€TN€37901„0869ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  Óò òòòM€E€M€O€R€A€N€D€U€M€€€O€P€I€N€I€O€NÌÌÌMembers€of€Panel:ÌÌó óóóÌPenny€J.€White,€JusticeÌRoger€E.€Thayer,€Special€JudgeÌJoe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€Special€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  Óò òAFFIRMED.à àà àà àà àà àà àà àTHAYER,€Special€Judgeó óÌœÌÌ›ÌÓÓà àThis€workers'€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€Special€Workers'ÏCompensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€in€accordance€with€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(3)€for€hearing€and€reporting€to€the€Supreme€Court€of€findings€of€factÏand€conclusions€of€law.€Ìà àPlaintiff,€Billy€Gibson,€was€awarded€100€percent€permanent€disability€benefits€byÏthe€Circuit€Court€of€œSevier›€County€as€a€result€of€an€accident€on€June€24,€1991,€when€heÏfell€backward€from€a€truck€to€the€ground€injuring€his€back.€€Defendants,€Wolf€TreeÏExperts,€Inc.€and€The€œAetna›€Casualty€and€Surety€Company,€have€appealed€insisting€theÏevidence€preponderates€against€the€finding€of€total€disability.Ìà àPlaintiff€is€40€years€of€age€with€a€third€grade€education;€he€cannot€read€or€writeÏand€was€employed€as€a€tree€trimmer€by€defendant€employer€for€almost€twenty€years;€heÍhad€back€surgery€(ruptured€disc)€in€1978€but€recovered€sufficiently€to€work€full€timeÏwithout€any€œreal›€problems;€his€injury€as€a€result€of€the€œJune›€1991€accident€resulted€inÏanother€ruptured€disc€and€this€surgery€did€not€appear€to€be€successful;€another€surgicalÏprocedure€was€performed€to€remove€bone€fragments;€he€told€the€trial€court€he€was€notÏable€to€return€to€work€as€a€tree€trimmer€or€do€any€other€type€work€on€a€regular€basis;€heÏadmitted€he€had€worked€at€what€he€called€ð ðpiddling€jobsðð€and€said€he€was€usually€on€theÏheating€pad€for€several€days€after€activity€of€this€nature;€his€complaints€of€pain€continuedÏup€to€the€date€of€the€trial.Ìà àPlaintiffððs€treating€physician€and€surgeon€was€Dr.€Archer€W.€Bishop,€Jr.,€whoÏtestified€by€deposition.€€Dr.€Bishop€testified€plaintiff€continued€to€complain€of€pain€duringÏhis€entire€treatment€period,€including€the€numerous€visits€after€the€last€surgicalÏprocedure.€€He€said€at€one€point€another€surgery€was€contemplated€but€was€notÏperformed€because€he€felt€the€chance€of€improvement€was€small.€€He€gave€plaintiff€a€12Ïpercent€medical€impairment€and€said€he€should€avoid€repetitive€bending,€stooping€andÏheavy€lifting€of€more€than€forty€pounds.Ìà àÌà àCraig€R.€Colvin,€a€disability€management€consultant,€testified€by€deposition€andÏwas€of€the€opinion€that€plaintiff€was€100€percent€vocationally€disabled.Ìà àDefendants€œcontend›€plaintiff€is€not€totally€disabled€because€he€admitted€he€hadÏdone€some€work€and€because€the€testimony€of€defense€witness€Jeffrey€Lewis€FowlerÏshowed€he€was€able€to€do€some€work.€€Witness€Fowler,€an€investigator€for€the€insuranceÏcompany,€observed€plaintiff€working€on€about€April€6,€1993,€while€clearing€brush€fromÏpremises€co„owned€by€the€witness.€€Fowler€had€requested€an€individual€to€approachÍplaintiff€with€this€job€œopportunity,›€and€the€witness€remained€inside€the€chalet€while€theÏwork€was€being€done.€€A€video€tape€was€made€of€this€observation€and€is€in€evidence.€ÏThe€evidence€on€the€video€showed€plaintiff€working€with€another€individual€in€clearingÏbrush;€using€a€chain€saw€to€cut€small€trees€and€limbs;€and€putting€wood€in€the€back€of€aÏpickup€truck€and€unloading€same.€€This€work€activity€was€over€a€œfive„hour›€period.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€is€otherwise.€€òòTenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ððóó€50„6„225(e)(2).Ìà àWhere€the€trial€court€has€seen€and€heard€witnesses€and€issues€of€credibility€andÏthe€weight€of€oral€testimony€are€involved,€the€trial€court€is€in€a€better€position€to€judgeÏcredibility€and€weigh€evidence€and€considerable€deference€must€be€accorded€to€thoseÏcircumstances.€€òòLanders€v.€Firemanððs€Fund.,€Inc.,€óó775€S.W.2d€355,€356€(Tenn.€1989).€€OnÏthe€other€hand,€where€evidence€is€introduced€by€deposition,€the€appellate€court€is€in€asÏgood€a€position€as€the€trial€court€in€reviewing€and€weighing€testimony.€€òòId.óóÌà àIn€order€to€qualify€for€total€disability€under€our€Workersðð€Compensation€œLaw,›€theÏinjury€must€totally€incapacitate€the€employee€from€working€at€an€occupation€which€bringsÏhim€an€income.€€òòTenn.€Code€Ann.€ððóó€50„6„207(4)(B).Ìà àIn€deciding€whether€an€employee€is€totally€disabled€under€this€definition,€theÏcourts€must€consider€many€factors€such€as€the€employeeððs€age,€education,€workÏexperience,€local€job€opportunities,€etc.,€and€this€is€to€be€examined€in€relation€to€theÏopen€labor€market€and€not€whether€the€employee€is€able€to€return€and€perform€the€jobÏheld€at€the€time€of€the€injury.€€òòœOrman›€v.€Williams„œSonoma›,€Inc.,€óó803€S.W.2d€672,€678Ï(Tenn.€1991);€òòClark€v.€National€Union€Fire€œIns›.€Co.,€óó774€S.W.2d€586,€588€(Tenn.€1989).Ìà àThe€mere€fact€the€employee€has€engaged€in€work€activity€may€or€may€œnot›Ïpreclude€a€finding€of€œtotal,›€permanent€disability.€€òòSeeóó€òòProst€v.€City€of€œClarksville›,€óó688ÏS.W.2d€425€(Tenn.€1985)€and€òòAmerican€Lava€Corp.€v.€œSavena›,€óó493€S.W.2d€77€(Tenn.Ï1973)€for€cases€finding€a€total€disability€award€was€not€supported€by€sufficient€evidenceÏwhere€the€employee€had€returned€to€work.€€However,€there€are€other€cases€where€totalÏdisability€awards€were€upheld€despite€some€work€activity€on€the€part€of€the€employee.€ÏSee€òòSkipper€v.€Great€Cent.€œIns›.€Co.,€óó474€S.W.2d€420€(Tenn.€1971)€and€òòœTennlite›,€Inc.,€v.ÏœLassiter›,€óó561€S.W.2d€157€(Tenn.€1978).Ìà àThese€cases€are€not€in€œconflict›€but€represent€different€holdings€under€differentÏfactual€situations.€€Thus,€evidence€of€re„employment€or€work€activity€is€a€fact€which€mustÏbe€closely€examined€and€weighed€in€with€all€of€the€other€factors€in€determining€theÏextent€of€permanent€disability.Ìà àDefendants€insist€the€facts€and€holding€of€the€òòProstóó€case€should€preclude€anÏaward€of€total€disability€in€the€present€case.€€We€disagree€and€find€plaintiffððs€medicalÏcondition€to€be€much€different€than€plaintiff€Prost.€€Having€made€a€close€review€of€theÏrecord,€we€cannot€say€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€finding€of€total€disability.Ìà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€with€the€costs€of€the€appeal€taxed€toÏDefendants€and€their€surety.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àRoger€E.€Thayer,€Special€JudgeÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌœ________________________________›ÌPenny€J.€White,€JusticeÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌJoe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€Special€œJudgeÇà àà àà àÌà àà àà àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌà à€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà à€€€€€€€€€€AT€KNOXVILLEÌÌÌÌÌBILLY€GIBSON,à à€à àà à€€€€€€€€€€€€)à àà àSEVIER€CIRCUIT€€€€€€à àà àà àà àà àà à€)à à€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€)Ìà àPlaintiff„Appellee,à àà àà à€)à àà àNo.€92,717Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€)à àà àNo.€03S01„9602„CV„0012Ìvs.à àà àà àà àà àà à€)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€)à àà àHon.€Ben€Hooper,€II,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€)à àà àJudgeÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€)ÌAETNA€CASUALTY€AND€SURETY€CO.€€)à àà àAFFIRMED€Ìand€WOLF€TREE€EXPERTS,€INC.à à€)Ìà à€à àà àà àà à€à à€)à àà àà àà à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ïà àDefendant„Appellants.à à€)à àà à€Ìà à€€à àà àà àà àà à€à àÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€ÌÌà àà àà àà à€€€€€€€€JUDGMENT€ORDERÌÌÌà àà àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€the€entire€record,€including€the€ÌÌorder€of€referralto€the€Special€Workersðð€Compensation€Appeals€Panel,€and€the€ÌÌPanelððs€Memorandum€Opinion€setting€forth€its€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€ÌÌlaw,€which€are€incorporated€herein€by€reference;ÌÌÌà àà àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€Memorandum€Opinion€ÌÌof€the€Panel€should€be€accepted€and€approved;€andÌÌÌà àà àIt€it,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Panelððs€findings€of€fact€and€ÌÌconclusions€of€law€are€adopted€and€affirmed,€and€the€decision€of€the€Panel€is€ÌÌmade€the€Judgment€of€the€Court.ÌÌÌà àà àCosts€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€defendants€/appellants,€and€ÌÌsureties€Hodges,€Doughty€&€Carson,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.€ÌÌÌ10/16/96ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌ€à àà à€€à àà àà àÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌ€à àà à€€œÔ€#ÔÔ€#Ô›Ìà à