ÿWPCo! …U*BV %˜U .žrÌ 0> Ë nÛ 0rßQw"Q4s 0J‡ 0TÑ 0^% 0hƒ 0rë 0|] 0†Ù 0_ 1uï 0ddÈB)áDC $M AMq B¾+Ûv~vÓ„ D3W 0@Š AOÊÆ 0Dß D/#! BR!ô\  `*Times New RomanTTô"ÝÆÿA€ArialTT'    0 .   (e2¸>$©©Ý ƒ í…!ÝÔ€X_ÞXôôÔÔ€X˜xXXX_ÞÔÓ  ÓÝ  Ý3|x«ô\  `*Times New RomanTTôôCô\  PŽ6QôP"ÝÆÿA€ArialTTomanTTXXaÝÆÿptQXpô\  `*Times New RomanTT¼¼^ô\  PŽ6Q¼Pô\  `*Times New RomanTT,,)ô\  PŽ6Q,Pô\  `*Times New RomanTT6ô\  PŽ6QPô\  `*Times New RomanTTXXPô\  PŽ6QXP(Jí…$¡¡Ô€XÄXôôÔÔ€X^ XXXÄÔÓ  Ó§VVÓ€Úƒç"2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ Ý ƒ !ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ôÔÔ€XÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ 8 ÒÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ@  ÔÚ  ÚÚ  ÚÔA  ÔÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓ% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd Ý ƒ !ÝÑ  ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ôÔÔ€XÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ 8 ÒÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ@  ÔÚ  ÚÚ  ÚÔA  ÔÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓ€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ d !Ý ƒ !ÝÑ  ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ôÔÔ€XÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌò òAugust€28,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$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€ÔÔ€ôÔÔ€XÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÑ\R AØ'\ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ 8 ÒÖ€ ÖÑ  ÑÔ&  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÙ€€ÙÖ€#ÖÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€¼ÔÔ€ÔßR€$&"A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRßÞ ÞÌIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌSPECIAL€WORKERS'€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELÌÌAT€KNOXVILLEÌ(March€18,€1997€Session)ÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓVERNON€SCOTT€GOAD,€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€,Ô€Ô€¼Ô€€€)€€€€€HAWKINS€CIRCUITÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Plaintiff„Appellee,€€€€€Ô€ôÔ€òò€óóÔ€¼Ô€)€€€€€Hon.€Ben€K.€Wexler,Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€Ô€Ô€¼Ô€€€Ô€Ô€Ô€¼Ô€)€€€€€Judge.Ìv.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€Ô€Ô€¼Ô€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€ôÔ€Ô€¼Ô€€€€€€)€€€€€No.€03S01„9606„CV„00064ÌCNA€INSURANCE€COMPANY,€€€Ô€Ô€Ô€¼Ô€€€€€)ÌGENERAL€SHALE€PRODUCTS€€€€€€Ô€Ô€Ô€¼Ô€€)ÌCORPORATION€and€LARRY€€€€€€€€€€Ô€,Ô€Ô€¼Ô€€€)ÌBRINTON,€JR.,€Director€of€Workers'€€Ô€,Ô€€Ô€¼Ô€)ÌCompensation,€Tennessee€Department€€€)Ìof€Labor,€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€Ô€Ô€¼Ô€Ô€XÔ€Ô€¼Ô€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Defendants„Appellants.€€€€)ÌÌÌÌòòFor€Appellant,€CNAóó:€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€òòFor€Appellee:óóÌÌRobert€D€Van€de€Vuurst€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Mark€A.€SkeltonÌSteven€H.€Trent€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€,Ô€Ô€¼Ô€€€€Rogersville,ÏTennesseeÌBaker,€Donelson,€Bearman€&€CaldwellÌJohnson€City,€TennesseeÌÌÌÌòòÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓM€E€M€O€R€A€N€D€U€M€€€€O€P€I€N€I€O€NóóÌÌÌÌÌòòMembers€of€Panelóó:ÌÔ'  ÔÌFrank€F.€Drowota,€III,€Associate€Justice,€Supreme€CourtÌWilliam€H.€Inman,€Senior€JudgeÌJoe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€Special€JudgeÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓAFFIRMED€IN€PARTÌREVERSED€IN€PARTÌÓ  ÓDISMISSED€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Loser,ÏJudgeÓ ¹ ÓÌòòÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓMEMORANDUM€OPINIONóóÓ rAÓÌÓ€ÓÓ ÂÓÓ  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€insists€the€award€of€permanent€partial€disability€benefits€isÏexcessive;€and€the€claimant€or€employee€insists€the€award€of€permanentÏpartial€disability€benefits€is€inadequate,€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€partÏof€the€claimant's€claim€to€be€time€barred,€the€appeal€should€be€dismissed€forÏfailure€to€file€part€of€the€transcript,€and€the€appeal€is€frivolous.€€AsÏdiscussed€below,€the€panel€has€concluded€the€trial€court's€judgment€that€theÏclaim€for€disability€benefits€resulting€from€a€1989€injury€is€time€barredÏshould€be€affirmed,€and€that€the€award€of€permanent€disability€benefits€fromÏa€1992€injury€should€be€reversed€and€dismissed.Ìà àà àThis€claim€involves€two€separate€injuries€to€the€claimant,€bothÏarising€out€of€and€in€the€course€of€his€employment€by€the€same€employer.€ÏThe€first€injury€occurred€in€November€of€1989,€when€the€claimant€strainedÍhis€lower€back€while€lifting€a€fuel€cell.€€The€treating€physician€diagnosedÏlumbar€disc€injury€with€mechanical€nerve€compression.€€He€was€unable€toÏwork€for€three€months.€€Although€the€doctor€assigned€a€permanent€wholeÏperson€impairment€rating€of€five€percent,€the€claimant€returned€to€work€andÏreceived€no€permanent€disability€benefits.Ìà àà àOn€April€8,€1992,€the€claimant€injured€his€neck€and€low€back€inÏa€fork€lift€collision,€but€was€unable€to€work€for€only€a€few€days.€€On€JuneÏ29,€1992,€he€saw€Dr.€Robert€J.€Wilson,€who€found€no€objective€evidence€ofÏinjury,€but€assigned€an€impairment€rating€of€three€percent,€from€subjectiveÏcomplaints€of€pain.Ìà àà àOn€January€5,€1993€and€June€25,€1993,€he€saw€Dr.€William€E.ÏKennedy,€who€diagnosed€chronic€low€back€and€cervical€syndromeÏsuperimposed€on€pre„existing€degenerative€disc€disease.€€Dr.€KennedyÏassigned€a€permanent€impairment€rating€of€eight€percent€and€restricted€theÏclaimant€from€activities€requiring€bending,€stooping,€squatting,€heavyÏlifting,€working€over€rough€terrain,€excessive€ladder€or€stair€climbing,Ïvigorous€or€strenuous€pushing€or€pulling,€repeated€and€vigorous€jostling,€orÏwork€requiring€his€hands€to€be€raised€above€the€level€of€his€shoulders.Ìà àà àThe€claimant€testified€at€the€trial€that€he€can€no€longer€doÏhousework,€ride€horses,€or€hunt€and€fish.Ìà àà àThe€trial€court€found€the€claim€for€benefits€for€disabilityÏresulting€from€the€November,€1989€injury€to€be€barred€by€the€statute€ofÏlimitations€and€awarded€permanent€partial€disability€benefits€based€onÏtwenty„one€percent€to€the€body€as€a€whole,€from€the€second€injury.€€Six€daysÏlater,€the€claimant€saw€another€doctor€and€obtained€a€release€to€return€toÍwork€with€no€restrictions.€€The€employer's€insurer€moved€to€alter€or€amendÏthe€award€and€the€trial€court€reduced€the€award€of€permanent€partialÏdisability€benefits€from€one€based€on€twenty„one€percent€to€one€based€onÏfifteen€percent€to€the€body€as€a€whole.Ìà àà àAppellate€review€is€de€novo€upon€the€record€of€the€trial€court,Ïaccompanied€by€a€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€findings€of€fact,€unlessÏthe€preponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€sectionÏ50„6„225(e)(2).€€This€tribunal€is€required€to€conduct€an€independentÏexamination€of€the€evidence€to€determine€where€the€preponderance€of€theÏevidence€lies.€€òòWingert€v.€Government€of€Sumner€Countyóó,€908€€S.W.2d€€921Ï(Tenn.€1995).Ìà àà àWhere€the€trial€judge€has€seen€and€heard€the€witnesses,Ïespecially€if€issues€of€credibility€and€weight€to€be€given€oral€testimony€areÏinvolved,€considerable€deference€must€be€accorded€those€circumstances€onÏreview.€€òòMcCaleb€v.€Saturn€Corp.óó,€910€€S.W.2d€€412€(Tenn.€1995).€€In€thisÏcase,€the€trial€judge€found€"that€the€plaintiff€and€his€witnesses€gave€falseÏtestimony€at€the€trial€as€to€the€plaintiff's€present€medical€work€restrictions,Ïand€the€activities€that€he€could€do€before€the€injury€and€the€lack€of€suchÏactivities€after€the€injury."€€We€have€consequently€disregarded€the€testimonyÏof€the€claimant€and€his€lay€witnesses,€in€our€findings€and€conclusions.Ìà àà àAn€action€by€an€employee€to€recover€benefits€for€an€accidentalÏinjury,€other€than€an€occupational€disease,€must€be€commenced€within€oneÏyear€after€the€occurrence€of€the€injury.€€The€action€in€this€case€wasÏcommenced€on€November€25,€1992,€more€than€one€year€after€theÏNovember,€1989€injury.€€We€affirm€trial€court's€finding€that€the€claim€forÏdisability€benefits€from€the€first€injury€is€time€barred.Ìà àà àThe€trial€court's€finding€that€the€claimant€will€retain€aÏpermanent€disability€from€the€second€accident€is€heavily€dependent€on€theÏcredibility€of€the€claimant,€for€the€medical€experts€based€their€opinionsÏlargely€on€the€employee's€complaints€and€the€history€he€provided.€€BecauseÏhe€lacks€credibility,€we€attach€no€value€to€the€opinions€of€the€medicalÏexperts.€€The€trial€court's€finding€that€the€employee€is€permanently€andÏpartially€disabled€is€accordingly€reversed.€€True€justice€does€not€tolerateÏfalse€testimony€given€for€the€purpose€of€enhancing€or€supporting€a€claim€forÏmoney.Ìà àà àWhen€it€appears€that€an€appeal€in€a€workers'€compensation€caseÏis€frivolous€or€taken€solely€for€delay,€the€reviewing€tribunal€may,€uponÏmotion€of€either€party€or€on€its€own€initiative,€award€damages€against€theÏappellant€in€favor€of€the€appellee€without€remand,€for€a€liquidated€amount.€ÏWe€do€not€find€this€to€be€such€a€case.Ó 4áÓÌà àà àWe€find€no€reversible€error€concerning€the€filing€of€theÏtranscript€of€the€evidence.€€The€complaint€is€dismissed.€€Costs€are€taxed€toÏthe€plaintiff„appellee.Ó ö€ÓÌà àà àÌà àà àÌà àà àÌà àà àÓ {ÀÓÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓ_______________________________Ó ÓÌÓ  Ó€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Joe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€JudgeÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓCONCUR:ÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌFrank€F.€Drowota,€III,€Associate€JusticeÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌWilliam€H.€Inman,€Senior€JudgeÌÇÇ