ÿWPCm 0U:° %êðn­ 0(­4ÕéñU,ñ 0Jwg 0T} 0^Ñ 0h/ 0r— 0|  0†… 0  1u› 0dU,t AM êíU6× U* B)7 DC` 0X£ D3û B. D+K AMv v~à vÓA AOÆc 0D)<þ6X9`("Courier 10cpiX3|x¯«<þ6X9`("Courier 10cpiXôxþ6X@É“8Ç;X@($¡¡dO˜ < Œ 9p`(Modern2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô Ó€«¯2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Monaco-%$Cþÿ << Gÿÿ àÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ ÔÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÔ€"ÔÔ€"ÔÔ YYY ÔÓ  ÓFILEDÔ€"XÔÌÌò òApril€26,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó< Œ 9p`(Courier New< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d####7Border 1dd(0"ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  ÒÒ  ÒÒ  Ò'''''ÿÿdxd d'ÈÈÈÈdxd-%$Cþÿ << GÿÿPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{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-%/(Cþÿ` << CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ ÔÓ&€X„d&ÓÑ#€Xd#ÑÔ€!ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÓ  ÓÑ  Ñò òÔ€"ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌSPECIAL€WORKERS'€COMPENSATION€PANELÌAT€NASHVILLEÌÓ  Óó óÌÌÌÌLINDA€MAY€KEPLEY,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àSUMNER€CIRCUITÌà àPlaintiff/Appelleeà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€Tom€E.€GrayÌv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àJudgeÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌYAMAKAWA€MANUFACTURING€à à)à àNO.€€01S01„9505„CV„00075ÌßL€ $;+'h|bž` ç `€€LßCOMPANY€OF€AMERICA€andà àà à)à à(No.€12456„C€Below)ÌYASUDA€FIRE€&€MARINE€€€€€€€€€€à àà à)ÌINSURANCE€COMPANYà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àDefendants/Appellantsà àà à)ÌÌÌÌò òòòFor€the€Appellantsóó:à àà àòòà àà àFor€the€Appelleeóó:€Ìó óÌD.€Brett€Burrowà àà àà àà àà àJoseph€Y.€Longmire,Jr.ÌBrewer,€Krause,€Brooks€&€Millsà àà àà àJones,€Longmire€&€Sindle€€ÌSuite€2600,€The€Tower€à àà àà àà à103€Bluegrass€Commons€BoulevardÌ611€Commerce€Streetà àà àà àà àP.O.€Box€738ÌNashville,€TN€€37203à àà àà àà àHendersonville,€TN€€37077ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  Óò òòòMEMORANDUM€OPINIONÌÌÌÌMembers€of€Panel:ó óóóÌÌJustice€Frank€F.€Drowota,€IIIÌSenior€Judge€John€K.€ByersÌSpecial€Judge€Robert€L.€ChildersÌÌÌÓ  Óò òAFFIRMEDà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àBYERS,€SeniorÏJudge€ÌANDÌREMANDEDÌÓÓòòà àó óóóThis€workers'€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€SpecialÏWorkers'ÌCompensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€in€accordance€with€òòTenn.€CodeÏAnnóó.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(3)€for€hearing€and€reporting€to€the€Supreme€Court€of€findings€ofÏfact€and€conclusions€of€law.Ô€!ÔÌÔ€"Ôà àThe€defendants€appeal€the€trial€court's€award€of€40%€permanent€partialÏdisability€to€the€right€upper€extremity.€€They€contend€that€the€plaintiff€did€not€proveÏthat€she€had€suffered€a€permanent€injury,€that€they€are€not€liable€for€such€injury,€if€itÏexists,€due€to€the€application€of€the€last€injurious€injury€rule€and€that,€even€if€herÏinjury€is€compensable€and€they€are€liable,€the€trial€court's€award€is€excessive.Ìà àWe€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ìà àThe€plaintiff,€45€at€the€time€of€trial,€has€a€G.E.D.€€She€has€worked€almostÏexclusively€in€manufacturing€facilities,€performing€mostly€assembly€and€packingÏjobs.€€She€began€working€for€the€defendant„employer€in€May€1991.€€In€July€1992,Íshe€began€experiencing€problems€with€her€wrists.€€She€was€eventually€referred€toÏDr.€Anderson,€a€neurologist,€who€took€her€off€work€for€about€three€weeks.€€SheÏreturned€to€work€after€this€respite€but€quit€after€a€few€months€to€move€to€Illinois€toÏmarry.Ìà àShe€testified€at€trial€that€her€arms€improved€while€she€was€off€work.€€SheÏtestified€that,€when€she€returned€to€work,€she€worked€with€pain€and€at€a€slower€rateÏthan€she€had€before.€€She€did€not€work€for€the€first€few€months€she€lived€in€Illinois,Ïand€she€testified€that€her€arms€improved€over€this€time€but€that€her€pain€neverÏresolved,€and€she€tried€to€use€her€left€hand€more€often.Ìà àDr.€Anderson€testified€that€an€E.M.G.€performed€on€the€plaintiff€prior€to€herÏbeing€taken€off€work€indicated€she€had€carpal€tunnel€syndrome€in€her€left€arm.€€ThisÏdiagnosis€was€consistent€with€the€plaintiff's€subjective€complaints€and€his€objectiveÏfindings,€he€testified.€€When€she€returned€from€Illinois€to€see€him€in€November,€heÏperformed€another€E.M.G.€on€her,€which€indicated€borderline€carpal€tunnelÏsyndrome€in€her€right€arm.€€At€the€plaintiff's€request,€he€released€her€to€return€toÏwork.Ìà àPlaintiff€began€working€for€R.G.€Ray€in€Illinois€at€the€end€of€January€1994.€ÏAfter€about€five€weeks,€she€began€experiencing€pain€in€her€wrists€again,€worseÏpain€than€she€had€previously€experienced.€€She€returned€to€see€Dr.€Anderson€onÏMarch€10,€1994.Ìà àDr.€Anderson€performed€a€third€E.M.G.,€which€revealed€findings€in€theÏnormal€range.€€He€testified€that€he€found€some€objective€findings€of€continuingÏneuropathy€on€his€physical€exam.€€He€restricted€the€plaintiff€from€moving€her€handsÍmore€than€four€times€a€minute€and€using€her€hands€for€more€than€six€hours.€€HeÏtestified€that€she€reached€maximum€medical€improvement€on€that€date.Ìà àPlaintiff€returned€to€R.G.€Ray€but€was€placed€on€medical€leave€since€theÏcompany€did€not€have€any€jobs€within€her€restrictions.€€She€returned€to€Tennessee,Ïwhere€she€unsuccessfully€attempted€several€manufacturing/packing€jobs.€€At€theÏtime€of€trial,€she€worked€as€a€sales€clerk€for€a€fireworks€store.Ìà àDr.€Anderson€assigned€the€plaintiff€a€five€percent€impairment€to€her€right€armÏunder€the€A.M.A.€Guides.€€He€opined€that€she€will€continue€to€have€an€underlyingÏcondition.€€He€also€opined€that€the€improvement€in€the€E.M.G.€findings€indicatesÏthat€she€received€no€additional€underlying€anatomical€injury€while€employed€withÏR.G.€Ray.Ìà àOur€review€is€òòde€novoóó€on€the€record€accompanied€by€the€presumption€thatÏthe€trial€court's€findings€of€fact€are€correct€unless€the€evidence€preponderatesÏotherwise.€€òòTenn.€Code€Ann.óó€ðð€50„6„225(e)(2).Ìà àThe€defendants'€contention€that€the€plaintiff€did€not€suffer€a€permanent€injuryÏfocuses€mainly€on€the€results€of€the€third€E.M.G.€€However,€Dr.€Anderson'sÏtestimony,€taken€in€context,€clearly€reveals€his€opinion€that€she€has€suffered€aÏpermanent€injury.€€Ìà àWe€do€not€agree€with€the€defendants'€contention€that€the€last€injurious€injuryÏrule€applies.€€For€that€rule€to€apply,€there€must€be€another€injury€or€aggravation€ofÏthe€condition.€€The€evidence€indicates€that€there€was€no€new€injury€during€herÏemployment€with€R.G.€Ray€and€that€any€aggravation€that€occurred€was€merely€anÏincrease€in€pain.€€Under€workers'€compensation€law,€no€injury€has€occurred€if€aÍpre„existing€condition€has€been€aggravated€merely€by€an€increase€in€pain.€ÏòòCunningham€v.€Goodyear€Tire€&€Rubber€Co.óó,€811€S.W.2d€888,€890€(Tenn.€1991).Ìà àFinally,€we€cannot€find€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trialÏcourt's€finding€of€40%€permanent€partial€disability€to€the€plaintiff's€right€arm.€ÏAlthough€her€anatomical€disability€is€low,€the€court€must€consider€factors€other€thanÏthe€anatomical€impairment€when€assigning€vocational€disability.€€€The€test€isÏwhether€there€has€been€a€decrease€in€the€employee's€capacity€to€earn€wages€inÏany€line€of€work€available€to€the€employee,€including€lay€and€expert€testimony,Ïemployee's€age,€education,€skills,€training,€local€job€opportunities,€and€capacity€toÏwork€at€types€of€employment€available€in€claimant's€disabled€condition.€€òòOrman€v.ÏWilliams„Sonoma,€Inc.óó€803€S.W.2d€672,€678€(Tenn.€1991).Ìà àThe€judgment€is€affirmed,€and€costs€are€assessed€to€theÏdefendants/appellants.Ô€!Ô€€Ô€"Ô€€€We€remand€the€case€to€the€trial€court€for€entry€of€anyÏorders€necessary€to€carry€out€this€judgment.ÌÌÓÓÌà àà àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌà àà àà àà àà àà àJohn€K.€Byers,€Senior€JudgeÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌFrank€F.€Drowota,€III,€JusticeÌÌÌÌòòÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌRobert€L.€Childers,€Special€Judge