ÿWPC # Æ# ä U:ï %) 0û/ w@*4j~ÆSÆ[Æ!ÆçÆ­ 0Js 0T½ 0^ 0ho 0r× 0|I 0†Å 0K 1uÛ 0dPU *´B)Þ BDC$ AOg¨¶v~^ D3ÜvÓ 0@â 0K"! D+m! AO˜! 0Dç! D/+" BZ" A©w"˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,hh,,,0nLlÎ, øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX(Óý,$¡¡Ñ  ÑÒH°ÒÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÔ€XûXXXÔÑ7€>‚XXdðXXdð7Ñ Ò ÓÔÕ ÖרÙEÚDÛÓ€·‚^!3|xæLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52 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< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d d$$$$7Border 1dd -.&Cþÿ << Gÿÿ žÝ ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€#ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ H ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÝ  ÝÔ€#ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€#XÔÌÌò òFebruaryÏ27,Ï1997ÌÌCecilÏCrowson,ÏJr.ÌÔ€#ôÔAppellateÏCourtÏClerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'h%%%%'ÿÿdxdStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó'ÈÈÈÈdxd -‚ƒCþÿ<< Cÿÿ($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd -.:›&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€#ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ H ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÝ  Ý›ò òÓ  ÓÞ ÞÌIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌSPECIAL€WORKERSðð€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANEL̜ـ ÙßR€'(&A1-j|` à. `€€@ÿRß›KNOXVILLE,€DECEMBER€1996€SESSIONÌÓ  ÓÌÌÌÌÌÌÒ  ÒÒ ° Òó óBOBBY€L.€MARLOWE,à àà àà à)à àCLAIBORNE€COUNTYÌà 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.€BILLY€JOE€WHITE,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àCHANCELLORÌVULCAN€MATERIALS€COMPANY,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellantà àà à)à àNO.€€03S01„9605„CH„00058ÌÌÌÌÌÌò òòòFor€the€Appellantsà àà àà àFor€the€Appellee:ÌÌó óóóJulia€S.€Howardà àà àà àà àSherry€BrashearÌHodges,€Doughty€&€Carsonà àà àWilliam€O.€ShultsÌ617€Main€Streetà àà àà àà à103€North€First€StreetÌKnoxvillle,€Tenn.€37902à àà àà àSuite€211Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àP.O.€Box€1626Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àHarlan,€Kentucky€€40831ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌò òòòÓ  ÓM€E€M€O€R€A€N€D€U€M€€€O€P€I€N€I€O€NÌÌÌÌMembers€of€Panel:ÌÌó óóóÌE.€Riley€Anderson,€JusticeÌRoger€E.€Thayer,€Special€JudgeÌJoe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€Special€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌò òÓ  ÓMODIFIED€AND€AFFIRMED.à àà àà àà àTHAYER,€SpecialÏJudgeó óÌÓÓà àThis€workers'€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€SpecialÏÑ  ÑWorkers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€in€accordanceÏwith€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(3)€for€hearing€and€reporting€to€theÏSupreme€Court€of€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.€Ìà àThe€appeal€has€resulted€from€a€finding€by€the€trial€court€that€plaintiff,ÏBobby€L.€Marlowe,€was€entitled€to€100%€disability€benefits€due€to€contracting€anÏoccupational€disease€while€in€the€employment€of€his€employer,€defendantÏVulcan€Materials€Company.Ìà àDefendant€Vulcan€contends€the€Chancellor€was€in€error€(1)€in€ruling€theÏstatute€of€limitations€had€not€expired;€(2)€in€finding€plaintiff€had€been€exposedÏand€injured€while€in€its€employment;€and€(3)€in€finding€plaintiff€was€totallyÏdisabled.Ìà àPlaintiff€was€55€years€of€age€and€had€completed€the€9th€grade.€€He€has€aÏlong€history€of€having€worked€under€conditions€exposing€himself€to€smoke,€dust,Ïetc.€€He€spent€about€16€years€working€in€a€steel€foundry;€about€10€yearsÍworking€for€various€coal€companies;€and€about€5€years€with€Vulcan€at€variousÏquarry€sites€where€his€exposure€was€to€rock€dust.Ìà àWhen€he€first€reported€to€work€with€Vulcan€in€1988,€he€had€a€chest€x„rayÏwhich€apparently€was€not€indicative€of€any€problems.€€He€began€having€someÏbreathing€problems€sometime€in€1991€and€was€x„œrayed›.€€As€a€result€of€thisÏexamination,€he€received€a€form€letter€dated€January€13,€1992€from€a€medicalÏclinic€in€Birmingham,€Alabama.€€This€informed€him€that€his€x„ray€showedÏð ðabnormalities€consistent€with€pneumoconiosisðð€and€advised€he€needed€to€seeÏa€physician.€€Vulcan€sent€him€to€see€a€specialist€in€Kingsport,€telling€him€the€x„ray€indicated€something€was€wrong.€€There€is€no€direct€evidence€as€to€theÏfindings€by€this€doctor.€€Plaintiff€continued€to€work,€saying€he€did€not€know€whatÏwas€wrong.€€Sometime€later€in€his€employment,€he€told€the€court,€his€conditionÏbegan€to€worsen.€€He€described€this€as€noticing€a€greater€shortness€of€breathÏand€said€any€exertion€would€result€in€his€being€completely€out€of€breath.€€Mr.ÏHowell,€the€safety€director€of€Vulcan,€discussed€the€situation€with€him€and€saidÏthey€would€try€to€work€with€him€and€keep€him€out€of€as€much€dust€as€possible.€ÏAt€some€later€point€in€time,€he€was€told€by€his€company€they€did€not€know€whatÏdisease€he€had€and€there€was€some€question€as€to€whether€it€was€black€lungÏdisease€or€a€condition€due€to€rock€dust.€€Vulcan€then€sent€him€for€anÏexamination€by€a€Dr.€Beyers.€€The€record€is€silent€as€to€any€direct€evidence€as€toÏthe€findings€by€this€doctor.Ìà àPlaintiff€continued€to€work€and,€finally,€in€1993€his€employer€reassignedÏhim€to€a€job€which€he€testified€he€told€company€officials€he€could€not€œdo›€due€toÍhis€condition.€€He€did€not€take€the€job;€was€subsequently€laid€off€from€work€onÏabout€August€20,€1993.€€The€record€indicates€he€has€not€worked€since€this€date.€ÏAt€the€trial,€he€said€he€still€coughed€up€yellowish,€black€and€brown€substancesÏand€was€taking€a€lot€of€different€medications.€€He€said€he€was€not€able€to€do€anyÏtype€of€work€and€was€also€aware€he€had€emphysema€and€asthma€problems.Ìà àPlaintiff€saw€Dr.€William€F.€Clarke,€a€physician€in€Lexington,€Kentucky,Ïwho€had€been€practicing€medicine€for€about€50€years.€€His€specialty€wasÏdiagnostic€cardiopulmonary€disease.€€Dr.€Clarkeððs€testimony€was€by€deposition,Ïand€he€examined€plaintiff€on€October€3,€1994.€€He€said€pneumoconiosis€wasÏdefined€as€interstitial€fibrosis€of€the€pulmonary€system€due€to€inhalation€ofÏindustrial€dust;€that€according€to€medical€textbooks,€there€were€64€differentÏtypes€of€this€condition;€that€silicosis€was€one€type€which€was€due€to€inhalation€ofÏrock€or€sand€dust;€that€coal€workerððs€pneumoconiosis€was€another€type€whichÏwas€due€to€inhalation€of€coal€dust.€€Dr.€Clarke€was€asked€whether€a€physicianÏcould€make€an€accurate€diagnosis€of€a€chest€disease€merely€by€an€x„rayÏreading.€€He€replied€this€would€not€be€sufficient€because€chest€x„rays€changedÏoften€and€this€was€caused€by€many€different€conditions.€€He€stated€it€would€beÏnecessary€to€take€a€detailed€history€from€the€patient€along€with€physical€andÏother€test€evaluations€in€order€to€reach€an€accurate€diagnosis.Ìà àDr.€Clarke€concluded€plaintiff€had€anthrosilicosis,€which€is€a€type€ofÏdisease€which€results€from€being€exposed€to€a€mixture€of€coal€dust€and€rock€orÏsand€dust;€that€in€his€opinion€plaintiffððs€employment€with€Vulcan€contributed€toÏcause€the€disease€and€injury;€and€that€plaintiff€was€100%€disabled€from€anyÍwork€activity.€€During€his€examination,€he€was€shown€x„rays€made€in€OctoberÏ1991€and€said€the€white€spots€through€the€lung€would€indicate€fibronodulationsÏindicative€of€anthrosilicosis.€€In€looking€at€another€x„ray€taken€in€1994,€he€said€itÏshowed€some€progression€of€the€disease.Ìà àOn€cross„examination,€counsel€pointed€out€to€the€doctor€his€written€reportÏgave€a€diagnosis€of€coal€workerððs€pneumoconiosis.€€He€said€this€was€an€errorÏby€his€typist€as€a€great€deal€of€their€work€involved€a€diagnosis€of€that€type€ofÏlung€disease.Ìà àPlaintiff€contends€this€diagnosis€by€Dr.€Clarke€was€when€he€first€becameÏaware€of€the€real€nature€of€his€problem€and€this€action€for€workersððÏcompensation€benefits€was€filed€on€November€17,€1994.Ìà àThe€Chancellor€also€heard€the€deposition€testimony€of€Dr.€David€A.ÏSlutzker,€a€physician€in€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€who€had€been€in€practice€sinceÏ1984.€€Dr.€Slutzker,€who€was€also€a€specialist€in€pulmonary€disease,€first€sawÏplaintiff€on€June€28,€1995€as€a€result€of€the€referral€by€another€doctor.€€HisÏexamination€and€tests€caused€him€to€conclude€plaintiff€had€obstructive€lungÏdisease€due€to€a€combination€of€emphysema€and€asthma;€he€was€of€the€opinionÏthat€the€emphysema€was€not€work„related;€and€he€also€found€interstitial€lungÏdisease€due€to€occupational€dust€exposure€but€said€he€did€not€have€enoughÏinformation€to€accurately€determine€causation.Ìà àDefendant€Vulcan€presented€the€deposition€testimony€of€Dr.€Jeffrey€DaleÏSargent,€a€physician€in€Bristol,€Tennessee,€who€had€been€in€practice€about€11Ïyears€and€who€was€specializing€in€internal€medicine,€critical€care€medicine€andÍpulmonary€diseases.€€Dr.€Sargent€never€saw€plaintiff€but€merely€gave€anÏopinion€after€reviewing€several€x„rays.€€He€testified€the€June€2,€1989€x„ray€didÏnot€indicate€findings€consistent€with€silicosis€but€showed€emphysema;€that€theÏOctober€18,€1991€x„ray€was€of€poorer€quality€and€showed€about€the€same;€andÏthe€January€12,€1994€x„ray€showed€no€technical€abnormalities€on€anythingÏconsistent€with€silicosis.Ìà àOur€review€of€the€case€is€òòde€novoóó€on€the€record€of€the€trial€courtÏaccompanied€by€a€presumption€of€the€correctness€of€the€findings€of€fact€unlessÏwe€find€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.€€òòT.C.A.óó€ðð€50„6„225(e)(2).Ìà àWe€are€required€under€this€review€to€examine€in€depth€a€trial€courtððsÏfactual€findings€and€conclusions,€and€we€are€not€bound€by€such€findings€butÏmust€conduct€an€independent€examination€to€determine€where€theÏpreponderance€of€the€evidence€lies.€€òòGalloway€v.€Memphis€Drum€Serv.óó,€822ÏS.W.2d€584,€586€(Tenn.€1991).Ìà àAn€employee€has€the€burden€of€proving€every€element€of€the€case,Ïincluding€causation€and€permanency€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence.€ÏòòTindall€v.€Waring€Park€Assððnóó.,€725€S.W.2d€935,€937€(Tenn.€1987).Ìà àWhere€the€trial€court€has€seen€and€heard€witnesses€and€issues€ofÏcredibility€and€the€weight€of€oral€testimony€are€involved,€the€trial€court€is€in€aÏbetter€position€to€judge€credibility€and€weigh€evidence€and€considerableÏdeference€must€be€accorded€to€those€circumstances.€€òòLanders€v.€FiremanððsÏFund€Ins€Co.,óó€775€S.W.2d€355,€356€(Tenn.€1989).€€On€the€other€hand,€whereÍevidence€is€introduced€by€deposition,€the€appellate€court€is€in€as€good€aÏposition€as€the€trial€court€in€reviewing€and€weighing€testimony.€€òòId.óóÌà àThe€first€issue€deals€with€the€statute€of€limitations.€€Defendant€VulcanÏcontends€the€filing€of€the€suit€on€November€17,€1994€was€not€timely€as€the€oneÏyear€statute€ran€after€the€beginning€of€plaintiffððs€incapacity€for€work€which€was€inÏ1991,€especially€when€he€quit€work€in€August€1993.Ìà àT.C.A.€ðð€50„6„306€provides€that€in€a€case€of€this€nature,€suit€must€beÏcommenced€ð ðwithin€one€(1)€year€after€the€beginning€of€the€incapacity€for€workÏresulting€from€an€occupational€disease.ððÌà àIn€the€case€of€òòIngram€v.€Aetna€Cas.€&€Sur.€Co.óó,€876€S.W.2d€91€(Tenn.Ï1994),€the€Supreme€Court€held€this€language€means€the€statute€begins€to€runÏon€a€disability€claim€when€the€employee€has€knowledge,€actual€or€constructive,Ïthat€he€has€an€occupational€disability€which€injuriously€affects€his€capacity€toÏwork€to€a€degree€amounting€to€a€compensable€claim.Ìà àWe€find€the€statutory€language€has€been€in€place€for€a€long€time.€€In€theÏcase€of€òòCash€v.€Ideal€Cement€Companyóó,€524€S.W.2d€644€(Tenn.€1975),€theÏemployee,€a€rock€quarry€worker,€was€exposed€to€rock€dust€over€a€27„yearÏperiod€of€employment.€€His€breathing€problem€became€so€bad€during€the€lastÏtwo€years€of€his€employment€that€he€retired€in€March€1973€realizing€he€hadÏhypertension€and€arthritis.€€Also,€he€knew€his€breathing€was€gone€at€this€time.€ÏDuring€June€1973,€he€was€admitted€to€a€hospital€where€diagnostic€studies€wereÏconducted€and€it€was€determined€he€had€silicosis.€€The€doctor€attending€theÏemployee€testified€the€condition€was€compatible€with€his€history€of€working€inÍthe€dusty€atmosphere€of€a€rock€quarry€and€it€was€his€opinion€the€silicosis€wasÏpresent€and€disabling€at€the€time€of€his€retirement€on€March€28,€1973.Ìà àEmployee€Cash€instituted€suit€on€May€1,€1974€and€upon€hearing€same,Ïthe€trial€court€dismissed€it,€finding€the€claim€had€not€been€instituted€within€oneÏyear€of€the€disability€on€March€28,€1973.€€The€Supreme€Court€reversed€findingÏthat€even€though€the€employee€was€incapacitated€at€the€time€he€retired€inÏMarch€1973€and€knew€his€incapacity€was€due€to€a€large€extent€to€his€difficulty€inÏbreathing,€the€diagnosis€of€silicosis€was€not€made€until€June€1973€andÏconstructive€knowledge€that€the€disability€was€due€to€silicosis€would€not€beÏattributed€to€the€employee€before€that€time,€and€the€statute€did€not€begin€to€runÏuntil€the€silicosis€diagnosis€was€made.€€The€court€also€quoted€from€an€earlierÏdecision€in€òòTenn.€Products€&€Chem.€Corp.€v.€Reevesóó,€415€S.W.2d€118,€119Ï(Tenn.€1967)€holding€that€ð ðbefore€the€statute€of€limitations€in€occupationalÏdiseases€cases€begins€to€run,€there€must€be:€€First,€an€incapacity€for€work;ÏSecond,€either€actual€or€constructive€knowledge€an€occupational€disease€is€theÏcause€of€the€incapacity€for€work.ðð€€Ìà àIn€the€present€action,€there€is€no€question€that€plaintiffððs€incapacity€forÏwork€began€in€1991€and€was€much€worse€when€he€ceased€working€in€AugustÏ1993.€€Neither€is€there€any€question€but€that€he€knew€that€his€condition€was€dueÏto€a€large€extent€to€his€difficulty€in€breathing.€€However,€we€do€not€find€sufficientÏevidence€in€the€record€that€he€had€either€actual€or€constructive€knowledge€thatÏhis€breathing€difficulty€was€due€to€an€occupational€disease€which€wasÏcontracted€or€aggravated€while€in€the€employment€of€Vulcan.€€To€the€contrary,Íthere€is€undisputed€evidence€that€he€was€informed€by€his€employer€that€theÏvarious€examinations€by€the€doctor€left€open€a€question€as€to€whether€hisÏcondition€was€due€to€coal€dust€or€rock€and/or€sand€dust.Ìà àThus,€it€seems€to€us€that€where€the€employee€has€been€in€theÏemployment€of€two€different€employers€and€could€be€exposed€to€two€differentÏtypes€of€pneumoconiosis€and€the€employee€is€aware€that€he€has€anÏoccupational€disease€but€has€no€knowledge€as€to€which€employer€could€beÏheld€responsible€for€the€condition,€it€would€not€be€proper€to€impute€constructiveÏknowledge€to€the€employee€greater€than€the€knowledge€possessed€by€theÏexamining€physician.Ìà àTherefore,€we€find€the€statute€of€limitations€on€this€workersðð€compensationÏclaim€began€to€run€during€October€1994,€when€employee€Marlowe€first€becameÏaware€that€his€employment€at€Vulcan€contributed€to€his€condition€and€that€hisÏaction,€having€been€instituted€the€following€month€in€November€1994,€wasÏtimely€filed€under€our€statute.Ìà àThe€next€issue€raised€by€the€employer€relates€to€the€sufficiency€of€theÏevidence€to€hold€it€responsible€for€plaintiffððs€condition.Ìà àT.C.A.€ðð€50„6„304€provides:ÌÓÓÌà8 àWhen€an€employee€has€an€occupational€disease,€the€employer€inÏwhose€employment€such€employee€was€last€injuriously€exposedÏto€the€hazards€of€the€disease,€and€the€employerððs€insuranceÏcarrier,€if€any,€at€the€time€of€the€exposure,€shall€alone€be€liableÏtherefor,€without€right€to€contribution€from€any€prior€employer€orÏinsurance€carrier.ÌÓÓÌà àUnder€this€statute,€it€is€not€the€last€employment€nor€the€last€exposure€toÏthe€hazards€of€the€disease€which€imposes€liability;€it€is€the€last€such€exposureÏthat€is€injurious€to€the€employee.€€òòMorell€v.€ASARCO,€Inc.óó,€611€S.W.2d€830Ï(Tenn.€1981).Ìà àDefendant€Vulcanððs€complaint€here€is€that€the€Chancellor€should€haveÏaccepted€Dr.€Sargentððs€testimony€over€the€medical€evidence€offered€by€plaintiff.€ÏThe€conflicting€medical€opinions€issue€was€resolved€by€the€trial€court,€and€weÏmust€conclude€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€conclusionÏplaintiff€was€injured€by€rock€and/or€sand€dust€during€the€course€of€employmentÏwith€Vulcan.Ìà àOur€review€does€require€us€to€make€a€modification€of€the€trial€courtððsÏruling.€€The€Chancellor€found€plaintiff€to€be€suffering€from€silicosis€and€said€hisÏruling€was€primarily€based€on€Dr.€Slutzkerððs€opinion.€€We€believe€the€referral€toÏDr.€Slutzker€was€merely€a€misstatement€as€this€doctor€said€the€employee€hadÏan€occupational€disease€but€he€did€not€have€enough€history€to€determineÏcausation.€€Dr.€Clarke€diagnosed€plaintiffððs€condition€as€anthrosilicosis€ratherÏthan€silicosis,€and€our€judgment€adopts€these€corrections€of€the€record.Ìà àThe€last€issue€questions€the€award€of€total€disability.€€There€wasÏconflicting€evidence€on€this€issue€also.€€The€trial€court€had€the€primary€burden€toÏreconcile€this€dispute.€€The€issue€is€reviewed€on€appeal€under€a€presumption€inÏfavor€of€the€ruling,€and€we€cannot€say€the€evidence€preponderates€against€thisÏfinding.Ìà àIt€results€the€judgment€entered€below€is€modified€and€affirmed.€€Costs€ofÏthe€appeal€are€taxed€to€defendant,€Vulcan€Materials€Company,€and€sureties.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àRoger€E.€Thayer,€Special€JudgeÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌE.€Riley€Anderson,€JusticeÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌJoe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€Special€œJudgeÇÒ  ÒÒ ° Òà àà àà àÌà àà àà àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌà à€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà à€€€€€€€€€€AT€KNOXVILLEÌÌÌÌÒ S ÒÒ ° ÒBOBBY€L.€MARLOWE.€€€€€€€€€€€€€à à€à à€)€€€€€€€€€CLAIBORNE€COUNTYà àà àà à€à à€à à€à à€à àÏ)à àNo.€10,413€€à àà à€€à à€€à àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà à€€à à€)à à€à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€)à àHon.€Billy€Joe€White€à àÌvs.à àà àà àà àà àà à€)à àChancellorÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€)à àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€)à à03S01„9605„CH„00058ÌVULCAN€MATERIALS€COMPANY,€€€€€€€€€€)€Ì€€€à à€à àà àà àà àà à€)à àà àà àà àà à€Ìà à€Defendants/Appellants.à àà à€)à àà àà àà à€Ô€#îÔÌÌÌÌÓffÓà àà àà à€€€€€€€€€€€òòJUDGMENT€ORDERóóÌÌà àà àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€the€entire€record,Ïincluding€the€order€of€referral€to€the€Special€WorkerððÏCompensation€Panel,€and€the€Panelððs€Memorandum€OpinionÏsetting€forth€its€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law,€whichÏare€incorporated€herein€by€reference;Ìà àÌà àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€theÏMemorandum€Opinion€of€the€Panel€should€be€accepted€andÏapproved€;€andÌÌà àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Panelððs€findings€of€act€andÏconclusions€of€law€are€adopted€and€affirmed,€and€the€decisionÏof€the€Panel€is€made€the€Judgment€of€the€Court.ÌÌà àCosts€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€defendant,€VulcanÏMaterials€Company€and€their€sureties,€Hodges,€Doughty€&ÏCarson,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.€€Ì€Ì02/27/97à àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌÌÌÓ` °« ¸ ™XÓÔ€#¼Ô.ÌÓ ` °œXÓÔ€#îÔÌÔ€#¼Ôà àà àÔ€#XÔ›