ÿWPCœ /Š¢,4n­DU:ñ %+ 0¸14éw@ý 0J= ‡ 0T 0^á 0h? 0r§ 0| 0†• 0 1u« 0d U*„ AQ® Æÿ 0DÅ 0@  0DIB) D/¶ Bå B D3DCR AM•iâv~KvÓÉ' Ë $ "Steve Miller 0 .   3|xé«*ô\  `(Times NewRomanTTôdô\  PŽÂCôP, øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX(/@$¡¡Ò°ÒÒ„°ÒÑ` °ÑÓÓÑTR[¨ AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TѵQ+! Ó Ô Õ Ö × ÙPÚÊÛÊÜÓ€æ2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  ÔHR2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô  ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Arial!"#$&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó% Line 7 d(('÷ÿ dxd düÿP Pd'''''ÿÿdxd%%%%7Border 1dd!#*Cþÿ << Gÿÿ _Ý ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ ` ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌSeptemberÏ13,Ï1996ÌÌCecilÏW.ÏCrowsonÌAppellateÏCourtÏClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtHHÚ(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 ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Geneva ÒÒ  BA Op Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ ` ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÝ  ÝÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÑ Ü ÑÓ` …Xì†XÓÑ\R AØ'\Ñò ò›Ô% € ÔIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌSPECIAL€WORKERS'€COMPENSATIONÏAPPEALS€PANELÌAT€NASHVILLEó ó€ò òMAY€1996€SESSIONó óÌÙ€!ÙÓ  ÓœßL€+,*;+'h|öÿÇ` à. `€€Lß›ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌNATIONAL€HEALTHCORP,€L.P.,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àRUTHERFORDÏCIRCUITÌà àPlaintiff/Appelleeà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNO.€€01S01„9510„CV„00187Ìv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€Robert€E.ÏCorlewÌJAMES€PUCKETT,à àà àà àœà à)›Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellantà àà à)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌòòò òFor€the€Appellant:óóà àà àà àà àòòFor€theÏAppellee:ÌÌó óóóD.€Russell€Thomasà àà àà àà àJohn€R.€œRucker›,€Jr.Ì218€West€Main€Streetà àà àà à14€Public€Square,ÏNorthÌSuite€Oneà àà àà àà àà àœMurfreesboro›,€TNÏ37130ÌœMurfreesboro›,€TN€37130ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÌò òòòMEMORANDUM€OPINIONÌÌÌÌÌÌMembers€of€Panel:ó óóóÌÌJustice€Adolpho€A.€Birch,€Jr.ÌSenior€Judge€John€K.€ByersÌSpecial€Judge€William€S.€RussellÌÌÌÌÌÓ  Óò òà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àœà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌAFFIRMEDà àà àà àà àà àà àBYERS,€Senior€Judge€›ÌÓÓà àó óThis€workers'€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€SpecialÏWorkers'ÌÓ ` ŒXÓCompensation€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.Ìà àThe€employer€filed€this€complaint€asking€the€trial€court€to€determine€whetherÏœthe€employee€sustained€any€permanent›€partial€disability€œas›€a€result€of€an€incidentÏat€work€in€which€œhe›€was€in€an€elevator€which€fell€or€sped€downward€for€ten€floors.Ìà àThe€trial€court€found€that€plaintiff€œsustained›€a€work„related€injury€resulting€inÏtemporary€disability€but€failed€to€meet€his€burden€of€proving€permanent€impairmentÏand€therefore€œwas€not€entitled€to€permanent›€partial€œdisability€benefits.›€€€The€courtÏfound€that€certain€court„ordered€temporary€total€disability€benefits€had€been€paidÏbeyond€the€employeeððs€period€of€temporary€disability,€and€ordered€the€employee€toÏreimburse€the€employer€$3,826.32€for€this€overpayment.€€Further,€the€court€orderedÍthe€employer€to€pay€medical€expenses€for€authorized€physicians€and€the€employeeÏto€pay€medical€expenses€œfor€treatment›€he€secured€on€his€own.€€An€issue€raised€onÏbriefs€as€to€the€characterization€of€benefits€so€as€to€affect€Social€Security€paymentsÏwas€withdrawn€by€employeeððs€counsel€at€oral€argument€and€will€not€be€discussedÏherein.Ìà àWe€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.Ìà àThe€employee€worked€for€this€employer€from€1990€until€February€1992,Ïwhen€he€was€involved€in€an€on„the„job€accident.€€On€February€19,€1992,€while€heÏwas€œin›€a€company€elevator,€œthe€elevator›€ð ðfellðð€or€traveled€too€quickly€from€theÏfourteenth€to€the€fourth€floor.€€œThe€employee›€was€tossed€about€inside€the€elevator,Ïwrenching€his€shoulder€and€neck.€€Ìà àThe€employee€was€treated€by€various€physicians,€some€of€whom€wereÏapproved€by€the€employer€and€some€of€whom€he€saw€on€his€own.€Ìà à€Dr.€Richard€Rogers,€an€orthopedic€surgeon,€found€degenerative€changes€inÏplaintiffððs€cervical€spine€not€caused€by€trauma.€€Dr.€Arthur€Cushman,€neurosurgeonÏprovided€a€second€surgical€opinion€at€œthe€courtððs›€order€and€found€no€permanentÏimpairment.€€à àœÌà àThe›€employee€consulted€Dr.€Richard€Fishbein,€orthopedic€surgeon,€and€Dr.ÏMelvin€Law,€orthopedic€surgeon,€on€his€own.€€Dr.€Fishbein€found€a€significantÏentrapment€of€the€spinal€cord€at€C5„6€possibly€due€to€a€combination€of€bone€spurÏand€a€disc€compromising€the€cord.€€He€assigned€the€employee€a€ten€to€twelveÏpercent€permanent€impairment€and€restricted€him€from€repetitive€lifting€of€more€thanÏtwenty€pounds€and€repetitive€work€above€the€shoulder.€€Dr.€Law€diagnosed€a€left„side€herniated€disc€at€C5„6€and€assigned€three€percent€impairment€for€the€lowerÏback€and€fifteen€percent€impairment€for€the€cervical€spine,€for€a€total€impairment€ofÏeighteen€percent€to€the€body€as€a€whole.€€The€trial€court€carefully€considered€andÏweighed€this€evidence,€accepting€the€testimony€of€Dr.€Rogers€and€Dr.€CushmanÏthat€the€employee€had€no€permanent€disability€over€the€contrary€opinions€of€Drs.ÏFishbein€and€Law.€Ìà àThe€employee€went€to€Dr.€Michael€McElroy,€Ph.D.,€psychologist,€on€his€own.€ÏDr.€McElroy€opined€plaintiff€was€experiencing€a€major€depressive€episode€resultingÏfrom€his€loss€of€physical€ability.€€He€referred€the€employee€to€psychiatrist€Dr.ÏNarcisco€Gaboy,€for€anti„depressant€medication€and€medical€maintenance.€€Dr.ÏGaboy€also€thought€plaintiff€had€a€marked€impairment€as€a€result€of€majorÏdepression€and€assessed€75€percent€permanent€impairment€for€this€psychiatricÏcondition.€€Dr.€Murphy€Thomas,€Ph.D.,€psychologist,€saw€the€employee€at€theÏemployerððs€request€to€evaluate€his€mental€status.€€Dr.€Thomas€administered€theÏMinnesota€Multiphasic€Personality€Inventory€and,€based€on€this€test,€opined€plaintiffÏwas€exaggerating€his€symptoms€of€depression€and€was€consciously€malingering.€ÏThe€court€found€that€the€testimony€of€Dr.€Thomas€more€credible€than€that€of€Dr.ÏMcElroy€and€Dr.€Gaboy€and€declined€to€award€permanent€impairment€based€onÏalleged€mental€disability.€€Ìà àAfter€weighing€the€medical€evidence€thusly,€the€trial€court€concluded€thatÏthere€was€insufficient€evidence€that€plaintiff€had€sustained€any€permanentÏanatomical€impairment.€€Further,€the€court€observed€€that€the€testimony€of€virtuallyÏall€of€the€medical€professionals€was€that€the€employee€had€in€some€mannerÍexaggerated€his€symptoms€or€was€malingering.€€Considering€all€of€this,€the€trialÏcourt€held€that€the€employee€had€not€proved€any€permanent€impairment€andÏentered€judgment€in€favor€of€the€employer€on€that€issue.€€Ìà àOur€review€is€òòde€novoóó€on€the€record€accompanied€by€a€presumption€that€theÏfindings€of€fact€of€the€trial€court€are€correct€unless€the€preponderance€of€theÏevidence€is€otherwise.€òòTenn.€Code€Ann.€ððóó50„6„225(e).€€€Ìà àThere€must€be€medical€evidence€to€show€an€impairment€exists,€unless€theÏimpairment€is€obvious,€to€support€an€award€of€permanent€disability.€€òòJohnson€v.ÏMidwesco,€Inc.,€óó801€S.W.2d€804€(Tenn.€1990).€€The€trial€Judge€may,€when€there€isÏa€difference€in€opinion€between€the€experts,€accept€the€opinion€of€one€or€more€overÏthe€opinion€of€another€or€others.€€òòJohnson,€supra.€óó€However,€when€the€medicalÏtestimony€is€presented€by€deposition€this€Court€is€able€to€make€its€ownÏindependent€assessment€of€the€medical€proof€to€determine€where€theÏpreponderance€of€the€evidence€lies.€€òòLanders€v.€Firemanððs€Fund€Ins.€Co.,€óó775ÏS.W.2d€355,€356€(Tenn.€1989);€òòHenson€v.€City€of€Lawrenceburg,óó€851€S.W.2d€809,Ï812€(Tenn.€1993).€€We€have€reviewed€the€depositions€and€medical€records€inÏevidence€and€find€that€the€trial€courtððs€accrediting€of€the€records€and€testimony€ofÏtreating€Drs.€Rogers€and€Cushman€over€those€of€doctors€the€employee€contactedÏon€his€own€(Dr.€Fishbein€and€Dr.€Law)€to€be€supported€by€the€evidence.€€€Further,Ïwe€agree€with€the€trial€judge€that€the€assessment€of€Dr.€Murphy€Thomas,Ïpsychologist,€that€the€employee€was€exaggerating€his€symptoms€and€consciouslyÏmalingering€is€credible.€€From€all€of€the€above,€we€concur€with€the€trial€judge€thatÏthe€evidence€does€not€support€a€finding€of€permanent€mental€disability.Ìà àDuring€the€long€course€of€this€litigation,€an€order€was€entered€requiring€theÏemployer€to€resume€payments€of€temporary€total€disability.€€Based€on€the€medicalÏevidence€admitted€at€trial,€the€court€found€that€the€employer€had€been€required€toÏpay€temporary€total€benefits€beyond€the€employeeððs€actual€period€of€disability€inÏthe€amount€of€€œ$3,826.32.›€€The€trial€court€ordered€the€employee€to€reimburse€thisÏsum€to€the€employer.€€The€evidence€shows€that€plaintiff€reached€maximum€medicalÏimprovement€and€returned€to€work€on€March€10,€1992.€€The€trial€court€did€not€err€inÏrequiring€the€employee€to€reimburse€overpayment€of€any€permanent€partialÏdisability€benefits€after€March€10,€1992,€and€we€affirm€on€this€issue.Ìà àAlthough€the€parties€briefed€the€issue€of€social€security€offset€in€any€award€ofÏbenefits,€the€employee€withdrew€this€issue€at€oral€argument€based€on€JudicialÏEthics€Committee€Opinion€95„10,€and€therefore€we€will€not€address€it.€Ìà àThe€decision€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed€in€all€respects€at€the€costs€of€theÏappellant€and€the€case€is€remanded.ÌÓÓÌà àà àà àà àà àà àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌà àà àà àà àà àà àJohn€K.€Byers,€Senior€JudgeÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌAdolpho€A.€Birch,€Jr.,€JusticeÌÌÌÌòòÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌWilliam€S.€Russell,€Special€Judge̛̜à àÌÌÌœ›ÌÌÌÌÌ