ÿWPC  :U:< %v|n­Œ 0(9U:a4›¯w@· ÷ 0lý 0Di D/­ÜeÜ 0JÝ 0T' 0^{ 0hÙ 0rA 0|³ 0†/ 0µ AQE Æ– 0D\ 0@  0Dà 1u$ B™ 0d¶ B D37 U6j U*  B)Ê DCó AM6 (ƒ ò«v~ºvÓ8<þ6X9`("Courier 10cpiX3|xA«<þ6X9`("Courier 10cpiXôxþ6X@É“8Ç;X@($¡¡, øð AZ‹"Arial Regular„e"( /P0D1P2P3D4P5U6D7D8Ó€HR((3þÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(%Ã$òòÚ  Ú1Ú  Úóó(('÷ÿ dxd2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô!"#$Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a) dP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓüÿP Pd&&&&'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(Courier New< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d22227Border 1dd!#3Cþÿ << Gÿÿ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€0ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€1ÔÔ€1ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€1XÔÌÌApril€25,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó èÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€0ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $Ýà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€1ÔWe€need€not€set€out€this€statute€for€the€discussion€in€this€case.Ì Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€0ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€1ÔÔ€1ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€1XÔÌÌApril€25,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$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 ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€0ÔÝ  Ý›Ñ  ÑÒ ° ÒÒ … ÒÒ  ÒÒ … ÒÑ\R AØ'\Ñò òÓ  ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€1ÔÑ7€{ÿXXdædÈ7ÑÑ  ÑœÔ% € ÔÞ ÞÌIN›€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEE̜ـ!ÙßR€453A1-j|÷ÿ` ç `€€@ÿRß›SPECIAL€WORKERS'€COMPENSATION€PANELÌAT€œNASHVILLE,€MARCH€1996€SESSION€€›ÌÓ  Óó óÌÌÌWILDA€GAIL€McCARTY,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àFENTRESS€CHANCERYÌà 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 àChancellorà àÌFAST€FOOD€MERCHANDISERS,€INC.,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendants/Appelleesà àà à)à àNO.€€01S01„9510„CH„00186Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à à(No.€œ91„138›€Below)€€€€€€Ìandà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌSUE€ANN€HEAD,€DIRECTOR,à àà à)ÌDIVISION€OF€WORKERSðð€à àà à)ÌCOMPENSATION,€TENNESSEEà à)ÌDEPARTMENT€OF€LABOR,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellantà àà à)ÌÌÌÌò òòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à àòòà àà àà àà àFor€the€Plaintiff„Appelleeóó:€à àÌÌó óCharles€W.€Bursonà àà àà àà àà àJohn€T.€MarchÌAttorney€General€&€Reporterà àà àà à100€South€Fifth€StreetÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àP.O.€Box€231à àÌDianne€Stamey€Dycusà àà àà àà àLaFollette,€TN€€37766Ì1510€Parkway€TowersÌ404€James€Robertson€Pky.à àà àà àò òòòFor€the€Defendant„Appelleeóó:ó óÌNashville,€TN€€37243„0499Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWalter€S.€Fitzpatrick,€IIIÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à46€North€Jefferson€AvenueÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àP.O.€Box€3347Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àCookevillle,€TN€€38501ÌÌÌÌÌÌò òòòÓ  ÓMEMORANDUM€OPINIONÌÌÌMembers€of€Panel:ó óóóÌÌJustice€Frank€F.€Drowota,€IIIÌSenior€Judge€John€K.€ByersÌœSpecial€Judge›€œRoger€E.€Thayer›ÌÌÌÌÌœò òÓ  ÓAFFIRMED€AS€MODIFIED›à àà àà àà àà àBYERS,€SeniorÏJudge€ÌAND€REMANDEDÌÑ  ÑòòÓÓà àó óóóThis€workers'€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€SpecialÏWorkers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€in€accordance€withÏòòTenn.€Code€Annóó.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(3)€for€hearing€and€reporting€to€the€Supreme€Court€ofÏfindings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.Ìà àThe€plaintiff€sustained€a€work„related€injury€to€her€right€arm,€and€the€trialÏcourt€found€she€suffered€a€33%€vocational€disability€to€the€right€arm€as€a€result€ofÏthe€injury€or€16.5%€to€the€body€as€a€whole.€€òòSee€Thompson€v.€Leon€RussellÏEnterprisesóó,€834€S.W.2d€927€(Tenn.€1992).Ìà àThe€plaintiff€had€been€injured€in€a€non„work„related€car€accident€in€1978,Ïand€she€had€injured€her€back€in€a€work„related€accident€in€January€of€1991.€€TheÏinjury€to€the€plaintiffððs€back€resulted€in€a€court„approved€workersðð€compensationÏaward€of€36.5%€permanent€partial€disability€to€the€body€as€a€whole.Ìà àThe€injury€to€the€plaintiffððs€right€arm,€the€January€1991€injury€to€the€plaintiffððsÏback€and€the€injury€received€in€the€1978€automobile€accident€combined€resulted€inÏthe€plaintiff€being€found€permanently€and€totally€disabled.Ìà àThe€trial€court€held€under€the€provisions€of€T.C.A.€ðð€50„6„208(a),€the€plaintiffÏwas€to€be€compensated€by€the€employer€for€the€16.5%€whole€body€disability€as€aÏresult€of€the€injury€to€her€arm€on€July€1991€and€by€the€Second€Injury€Fund€forÏ83.5%€whole€body€disability.€€Because€of€the€plaintiffððs€low€rate€of€pay,€the€trialÏcourt,€applying€T.C.A.€ðð€50„6„207(4)(A),€found€the€plaintiff€to€be€entitled€to€receiveÏpayment€for€550€weeks€rather€than€400€weeks,€the€permanent€total€disabilityÏbenefits€normally€applicable.€€The€trial€judge€assessed€all€of€this€extra€150€weeksÏto€the€Second€Injury€Fund.Ìà àOur€standard€of€review€is€òòde€novoóó€on€the€record,€accompanied€by€theÏpresumption€that€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€are€correct,€unless€theÏpreponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.€€T.C.A.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(2).€€Where€theÏissue€is€one€of€law,€our€standard€of€review€is€òòde€novoóó€without€a€presumption€ofÏcorrectness.€€òòBradshaw€v.€Old€Republic€Ins.€Co.óó,€922€S.W.2d€503,€503€(Tenn.Ï1996).Ìà àThe€Fund€contends€the€trial€court€should€have€applied€T.C.A.€ðð€œ50„6„208(b)›Ïin€determining€whether€the€plaintiff€was€100%€disabled€rather€than€making€theÏdetermination€under€T.C.A.€ðð€œ50„6„208(a).›× ƒ6 ××  ×€€Further,€the€Fund€insists€that€if€the€trialÍcourt€correctly€œapportioned›€the€award€in€this€case,€the€additional€payment€of€150Ïweeks€should€have€been€apportioned€between€the€employer€and€the€Fund.Ìà àThe€employer€appeals€on€the€issue€of€whether€the€award€of€33%€vocationalÏdisability€to€the€right€arm€is€excessive.€€We€have€examined€that€issue€and€find€theÏrecord€supports€the€award€of€33%€to€the€œright€arm.›Ìà àThe€position€of€the€Fund€as€to€the€proper€application€of€T.C.A.€ðð€œ50„6„208›€inÏthis€case€was€correct€when€they€filed€their€brief€on€November€22,€1995.€€TheÏdecision€of€the€Workersðð€Compensation€Appeals€Panel€was€delayed€œin€this€caseÏpending›€the€determination€of€the€Supreme€Court€in€the€case€of€òòPerry€v.€Sentry€Ins.ÏCo.óó,€No.€03S01„9507„CH„00077€(filed€at€Knoxville,€December€23,€1996)€(forÏpublication).€€In€that€case,€the€Supreme€Court€held€that€sections€(a)€and€(b)€ofÏT.C.A.€ðð€50„6„208€were€not€mutually€exclusive€and€that€a€worker€who€had€aÏprevious€non„work„related€injury,€a€subsequent€compensable€work„related€injury,Ïand€a€current€compensable€injury,€which€œin›€combination€rendered€the€employeeÏpermanently€and€totally€disabled,€œwas€entitled›€to€recover€from€the€Second€InjuryÏFund€even€though€the€sum€total€of€the€previous€workersðð€compensation€award€withÏthe€current€award€does€not€amount€to€100%€disability.Ìà àPrior€to€this€ruling,€the€plaintiff€in€this€case€would€have€been€limited€to€aÏfinding€that€she€was€only€53%€disabled.€€This€would€have€absolved€the€Fund€fromÏliability€in€this€case.€€However,€òòPerryóó€has€resolved€that€issue€and€the€Fund€is€liableÏin€this€case€for€83.5%€of€the€award.Ìà àWe€now€examine€the€œremaining›€issue€of€whether€the€Fund€is€liable€for€all€ofÏthe€150€weeks€of€payment€under€T.C.A.€ðð€50„6„207(4)(A)€or€whether€this€should€beÏapportioned€in€accordance€with€the€proportionate€liability€of€the€employer€and€theÏFund.Ìà àIn€òòReagan€v.€American€Policyholders€Ins.€Co.óó,€842€S.W.2d€249€(Tenn.Ïœ1992),€the›€œCourt›€held€the€additional€payments€should€be€thus€apportioned.€€TheÏplaintiff€œsays›€òòReagan€óóis€not€applicable€in€this€case€because€the€injury€in€òòReaganóóÏwas€to€the€body€as€a€whole€and€the€injury€in€this€case€is€to€a€scheduled€member.€ÏWe€see€little€distinction€in€this€argument.€€We,€therefore,€find€the€employer€is€liableÏfor€16.5%€of€the€additional€150€weeks€and€the€Fund€is€liable€for€83.5%€of€the€150Ïweeks.Ìà àWe€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court,€as€modified€to€reflect€proportionateÏliability€for€the€employer€and€the€Fund€for€the€extra€150€weeks.€€We€remand€theÏcase€to€the€trial€court€for€all€appropriate€purposes€and€for€the€assessment€of€theÏcosts€of€appeal,€which€are€assessed€to€the€employer€and€the€Fund€in€proportion€toÏtheir€liability.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌà àà àà àà àà àà àJohn€K.€Byers,€Senior€JudgeÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌFrank€F.€Drowota,€III,€JusticeÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌœSpecial€Judge€Roger€E.€ThayerÔ€0ÔÌÇÒ  ÒÒ £ Òòòà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌWILDA€GAIL€McCARTY,à àà àà à}à àFENTRESS€CHANCERYÌà àà àà àà àà àà à}à àNo.€91„138€BelowÌà àPlaintiff/Appelleeà àà à}Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à}à àHon.€Billy€Joe€White,Ìvs.à àà àà àà àà àà à}à àChancellorÌà àà àà àà àà àà à}ÌFAST€FOOD€MERCHANDISERS,à àà à}ÌINC.,à àà àà àà àà à}à àNo.€01S01„9510„CH„00186Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à}Ìà àDefendant/Appelleeà àà à}ÌßJ€47;+'b|` ç `€@ÿJßà àà àà àà àà àà à}Ìandà àà àà àà àà àà à}Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à}ÌSUE€ANN€HEAD,€DIRECTOR,€à àà à}à àAFFIRMED€AS€MODIFIEDÌDIVISION€OF€WORKERSðð€à àà à}à àAND€REMANDED.ÌCOMPENSATION,€TENNESSEEà àà à}ÌDEPARTMENT€OF€LABOR,à àà à}à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à}Ìà àDefendant/Appellantà àà à}ÌÌà@ àJUDGMENT€ORDERÌÌÌÓ€Óà àà àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€the€entire€record,Ïincluding€the€order€of€referral€to€the€Special€Workers'ÏCompensation€Appeals€Panel,€and€the€Panel's€Memorandum€OpinionÏsetting€forth€its€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law,€whichÏare€incorporated€herein€by€reference.Ìà àà àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€MemorandumÏOpinion€of€the€Panel€should€be€accepted€and€approved;€andÌà àà àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Panel's€findings€ofÏfact€and€conclusions€of€law€are€adopted€and€affirmed,€and€theÏdecision€of€the€Panel€is€made€the€judgment€of€the€Court.ÌÓ ` ` šXÓà àà àCosts€will€be€paid€by€the€employer,€Fast€FoodÏMerchandisers,€at€a€rate€of€16.5%,€and€the€Second€Injury€Fund€at€aÏrate€of€83.5%€which€is€in€proportion€to€their€liability€inÍaccordance€with€the€opinion,€for€which€execution€may€issue€ifÏnecessary.ÌÓÓà àà àIT€IS€SO€ORDERED€on€Ô"USú ú, úÔÔ ƒ ÔÔ!  Ô.ÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPER€CURIAMóó›