ÿWPCŒ …# VUNa %¯ 0(µ4Ýñ w@ EH 0JJ 0T” 0^è 0hF 0r® 0| 0†œ 0" 1u² U,' 0dS U,· U>ã B)!DCJ AM BÚU*÷!v~# D3¡vÓÔ 0@§ AOçÆ6 0Dü D/@ Bo˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡z!œ¼œ¼ 3|x ®g¯D°±²P³´[µ¶Ó€Â2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d####7Border 1dd€-$Cþÿ << Gÿÿ d< Œ 9p`(Arial øÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÔ€'ÔÔ€'ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€'XÔÌÌò òSeptember€9,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€'ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@&&&&'ÿÿdxdStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA Op Monaco Ò("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚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'\ÑÓÓÓÓœò 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§ äAßÌÌJOHN€IVORY,€JR.,à àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌÓ` °‰XNx‘XÓà àPlaintiff„Appellant,à àà àà à)à àà àGIBSON€CHANCERYÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àà àÌV.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àà àHon.€George€Ellis,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àà àChancellorÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)̜ـ€ÙÙ€€ÙßL€%($;+'h|Öó` Å `€€Lß›EMERSON€MOTOR€COMPANY,à0 à)à àà àNo.€€02S01„9505„CH„00042€Ï)€€€€€€€€€€Ìà àDefendant„Appellee.à àà à)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌòòFor€Appellant:à àà àà àà àà àà àForÏAppellee:óóÌÌRaymond€L.€œIvey›à àà àà àà àà àà àP.€Allen€Phillips€€à0 àÌIvey,€Parish€&€Johns€à0 àà àà àà àà àWaldrop€&Ô€"XÔ€Hall,€P.A.ÌHuntingdon,€TNà àà àà àà àà àà àJackson,€TN€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌà@ àÌÌÌÌà@ àòòMEMORANDUM€OPINIONóóÌÌÌÌà@ àÌÌà@ àòòMembers€of€Panel:ÌÌà@ àóóLyle€Reid,€Associate€Justice,€Supreme€CourtÌà@ àJoe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€Special€JudgeÌà@ àJanice€M.€Holder,€Special€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌAFFIRMEDà àà àà àà àà àà àHolder,€JudgeÌÓÓÔ€"ŠÔà àThis€workers'€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€SpecialÏÑ7€¶XdìXXdì7ÑWorkers'€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.€€Our€scope€of€review€of€findings€of€fact€by€the€trial€court€isÏòòde€novo€óóupon€the€record€of€the€trial€court,€accompanied€by€a€presumption€ofÏcorrectness,€unless€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.€Tenn.CodeÏAnn.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(2).Ìà àThe€employee€contends€the€trial€court€erred€in:Ìà8 àœ1.à àFailing›€to€assign€permanent€partial€disability€to€the€right€armÏas€opposed€to€the€right€hand;€and€€Ìà8 àœ2.à àLimiting›€the€œaward€of›€permanent€partial€disability€benefits€toÏ55%€to€the€right€hand.ÌWe€affirm€the€trial€court€in€all€respects.Ìà àThe€plaintiff,€John€Ivory,€Jr.,€(ð ðIvoryðð)€is€25€years€of€age€with€an€eleventhÏgrade€education.€€He€received€a€G.E.D€and€successfully€completed€Job€CorpsÏtraining€in€brick€masonry.€€His€previous€work€experience€included€upholsteringÏfurniture,€working€as€a€construction€laborer€and€as€a€production€line€worker€at€aÏcheese€factory.Ìà àOn€August€15,€1992,€Ivory€was€repairing€a€die€cast€machine€for€EmersonÏMotor€Company€when€the€machine€activated,€injuring€the€fingers€of€his€rightÍhand.€€Ivory€was€treated€by€Dr.€Frederick€Torstrick,€an€orthopedic€surgeon,€forÏcrush€injuries€to€the€index,€long€and€ring€fingers,€fractures€to€the€index€and€ringÏfingers,€and€longitudinal€lacerations€to€the€top€and€bottom€of€his€hand.€€€A€laterÏsurgical€procedure€performed€to€improve€movement€required€incisions€in€each€ofÏthe€injured€fingers,€the€removal€of€adhesions€between€the€tendon€and€underlyingÏbone€and€cutting€of€some€of€the€tissues€of€the€capsule€of€the€joints.€€Ivory€wasÏreferred€to€a€work€hardening€program€where€there€was€some€question€of€hisÏcooperation.€ÌÑ#€öØXÿÿd#Ñà àDr.€Torstrickððs€deposition€is€the€only€medical€proof€offered.€€Basing€hisÏtestimony€on€the€American€Medical€Association€Guides€to€the€Evaluation€ofÏPermanent€Impairment,€Fourth€Edition,€he€calculated€the€impairments€to€IvoryððsÏindex,€long,€ring€and€small€fingers.€€He€assessed€an€additional€one€percent€(1%)Ïimpairment€due€to€restriction€in€movement€of€the€wrist€and€assessed€aÏð ðcumulativeðð€impairment€rating€of€twenty„two€percent€(22%)€to€the€rightÏð ðupper€extremity.ðð€Ìà àOn€cross€examination,€Dr.€Torstrickððs€strict€adherence€to€the€AMA€GuidesÏwas€called€into€question€and€some€discrepancies€in€the€individual€calculations€forÏeach€finger€were€discussed.€€Taking€the€individual€calculations€of€impairment,Ïhowever,€Dr.€Torstrick€testified€that€Ivory€had€a€twenty„two€percent€(22%)Ïimpairment€to€the€hand.€€This€was€a€separate€finding€from€the€twenty„two€(22%)Ïimpairment€to€the€upper€extremity€that€he€had€assessed.€€Ìà àThe€impairment€of€one€percent€(1%)€to€the€upper€extremity€was€madeÏusing€his€own€method€of€determining€impairment.€€Dr.€Torstrick€agreed€thatÏfollowing€the€AMA€Guides€would€require€him€to€assess€a€zero€percent€(0%)Íimpairment€to€the€upper€extremity€as€to€Ivoryððs€wrist€motion,€restriction€andÏextension.€€Ìà àAfter€a€period€of€light€duty,€Ivory€returned€to€full„time€employment,Ïincluding€some€overtime€employment.€€He€experienced€some€difficulty€inÏperforming€some€of€the€duties€of€his€machine€operator€job€and€was€moved€to€aÏmonitoring€position€on€the€line,€making€adjustments€to€the€machines€whenÏnecessary.€€Because€of€his€ability€to€quickly€set€up€the€machines,€Ivory€wasÏrequired€to€report€to€work€early.€Ìà àIvory€was€described€as€an€"above€average"€employee.€€€Although€hisÏlabor€grade€changed,€altering€the€wage€ceiling€available€to€him,€Ivoryððs€hourlyÏrate€increased€from€$6.13€to€$8.74.Ìà àIvory€described€and€demonstrated€his€difficulty€in€making€a€fist€andÏtestified€to€his€inability€to€use€his€hand€to€pull€the€trigger€of€his€gun€and€to€grip€aÏbaseball.Ìà àThe€chancellor€found€that€Mr.€Ivory€suffered€a€fifty„five€percent€(55%)Ïpermanent€partial€disability€to€the€dominant€right€hand€as€a€result€of€the€accident.€ÌÌà0 àà àà0 àà àà@ àASSESSMENT€OF€PERMANENT€DISABILITY€TO€THE€HANDÌà àThe€claimant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€assigning€a€permanentÏpartial€disability€to€the€hand€instead€of€to€the€arm€and€makes€the€curiousÏstatement€that€the€"only€medical€evidence€available€to€the€trial€court€assigned€theÏanatomical€disability€to€the€upper€extremity."€€Claimant€argues€that€the€medicalÏproof€shows€that€the€upper€extremity€is€affected€"due€to€limited€motion€in€theÏwrist,€separate€from€the€œhand."€›€This€argument€is€unpersuasive.€€Ìà àThat€Dr.€Torstrick€œassessed€an€impairment€to€the€ð ðupper€extremityðð€asÏwell€as€an€assessment€of€impairment€to€the€hand€does€not€compel€the€trial€courtÏtoward€benefits€to€the€arm.€€If€there€is€an€injury€to€a€specified€member€under€theÏstatute€and€not€to€any€other€part€of€the€body€then€the€compensation€awarded€forÏthe€injury€to€such€scheduled€member€is€binding.€€òòShores€v.€Shores,óó€395€S.W.2dÏ388€(Tenn.€1965).€€Statutory€schedules€must€control€a€disability€award€for€anÏinjury€to€a€scheduled€member€only.€€òòWells€v.€Sentryóó,€834€S.W.2d€935,€938€(Tenn.Ï1992).€€à àThe€medical€treatment€was€to€the€hand€and€fingers€exclusively.€ÏThe€treating€physicianððs€testimony€centered€on€the€mobility€and€flexibility€of€theÏhand€and€fingers.€€Dr.€Torstrick€provided€an€anatomical€rating€of€twenty„twoÏpercent€(22%)€to€the€hand€as€well€as€to€the€upper€extremity.€€The€only€testimonyÏthat€would€provide€an€argument€for€an€extension€of€the€disability€to€the€arm€wasÏDr.€Torstrickððs€assessment€of€disability€to€the€wrist€of€one€percent€(1%)€using€hisÏown€method€of€computation.€€The€assessment€under€the€AMA€guidelines€wouldÏhave€been€zero€percent€(0)%).ÌÓÓà8 àTo€provide€uniformity€and€fairness€for€all€parties,€any€medical€reportÏprepared€by€a€physician€furnishing€medical€treatment€to€a€claimantÏshall€use€the€American€Medical€Association€Guides€to€theÏEvaluation€of€Permanent€Impairment,€(American€MedicalÏAssociation)€or€the€manual€for€Orthopedic€Surgeons€in€EvaluatingÏPermanent€Physical€Impairment,€(American€Academy€of€OrthopedicÏSurgeons).€A€physician€shall€utilize€the€most€recent€edition€of€eitherÏpublication€in€determining€the€degree€of€anatomical€impairment.€AÏpractitioner€shall€be€required€to€give€an€impairment€rating€based€onÏone€(1)€of€the€two€(2)€publications€noted€above.ÌÌÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„204€(d)(3).€€Ìà àThe€claimantððs€own€testimony€supports€limitations€to€the€use€of€his€handÏand€not€to€the€use€of€his€arm.€Ìà àÌÓÓÓ  ÓAWARD€OF€FIFTY„FIVE€PERCENT€(55%)€ÌPERMANENT€PARTIAL€DISABILITYÌÌÓÓÓ  Óà àIvory€contends€that€the€trial€court€should€have€awarded€a€permanentÏpartial€disability€in€excess€of€fifty„five€percent€(55%).€€The€test€is€whether€thereÏhas€been€a€decrease€in€the€employee's€capacity€to€earn€wages€in€any€line€of€workÏavailable€to€the€employee.€€òòCorcoran€v.€Foster€Auto€GMC,€Incóó.,€746€S.W.2d€452,Ï459€(Tenn.€1988).Ìà àThe€trial€court€may€consider€many€pertinent€factors,€including€age,€jobÏskills,€education,€training,€duration€of€disability,€anatomical€disabilities€establishedÏby€medical€experts,€and€job€opportunities€available€to€a€worker€with€thoseÏanatomical€disabilities,€to€determine€the€extent€of€the€worker's€industrialÏdisability.€€òòWorthington€v.€Modine€Manufacturing€Co.óó,€798€S.W.2d€232,€234Ï(Tenn.€1990).€€The€extent€of€vocational€disability€is€a€question€of€fact€to€beÏdetermined€from€all€of€the€evidence.€€òòCooper€v.€Insurance€Co.€of€€North€America,óóÏ884€S.W.2d€446,€451€(Tenn.€1994).€€Ìà àThe€claimant€is€25€years€of€age.€€He€is€a€valued€employee€whose€job€is€inÏno€danger€and€who€works€a€forty„hour€work€week,€with€overtime.€€While€hisÏlabor€grade€has€changed,€his€wages€have€increased€since€his€injury.€€€TheÏevidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€court's€finding€that€Mr.€IvoryÏsuffered€a€fifty„five€percent€(55%)€vocational€disability.Ìà àThe€judgment€is€affirmed€and€the€cause€remanded€to€the€trial€court€forÏcollection€of€costs€and€enforcement€of€judgment.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€toÏthe€plaintiff„appellant.ÌÔ€"XÔÌÔ€"ŠÔÌÓÓÏà àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 à_____________________________________Ìà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àJanice€M.€Holder,€JudgeÌÓÓÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÓÓ________________________________ÌLyle€Reid,€Associate€JusticeÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌJoe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€Special€JudgeÓÓ