WPC  4# UN %A 0NG 0bFw@N4?G 0JG 0T 0^ 0hC 0r 0| 0 0 1u 0d$ AQ  0j 0@  0DI D/ B B D3U>)B)gDC AMU* HJ=v~vMHP LaserJet 4 PlusHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLH'"  Z 6Times New Roman Regular(&y$   (a(2T$ y!     X X    0  - - DEӀUDe"(3|xMARY W. SCOTT V. KENNY PIPE & SUPPLY - BRANDT OPINION  ' ' IB011C20IB011C2 .   2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X!"#$&C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(B3w$ y!     ("$    ($$   1  ((' dxd dP Pd'''''dxd<  9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d,,,,7Border 1dd!#-C << G<  9p`(Arial > !  #d#++   ""  //   YYY FILED/XApril25,1997CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk   3 !#d#++   ""  //   YYY FILED/XApril25,1997CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk  PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva ! . ++   ݛ        \RA'\  \RA'\7Fdd7    @ + INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE̜!R.0-A1-j|`  `@Rߛ@ SPECIALWORKERSCOMPENSATIONAPPEALSPANEL@ ATNASHVILLE+@ +(January23,1997Session)+ + MARYW.SCOTT,   )      ) DAVIDSONCIRCUIT Plaintiff/Appellee,  )      ) Hon.MariettaM.Shipley,      ) JudgeVS.      )      ) No.01S019607CV00140      ) KENNYPIPE&SUPPLY,INC. )andROYALINSURANCE  )COMPANYOFAMERICA,  )      ) Defendants/Appellants.  )FortheAppellants:     FortheAppellee:DavidT.Hooper      M.LindaHughesHOOPER&HOOPER     Nashville,TennesseeBrentwood,Tennessee̛̜@ +  MEMORANDUMOPINION ̛̜+@ MembersofPanel:0 0 AdolphoA.Birch,Jr.,ChiefJustice,SupremeCourt    RobertS.Brandt,SeniorJudge    JoeC.Loser,Jr.,SpecialJudge̛̜AFFIRMED       Brandt,SeniorJudge+@ MEMORANDUMOPINION + ThisworkerscompensationappealhasbeenreferredtotheSpecialWorkersCompensationAppealsPaneloftheSupremeCourtinaccordancewithTenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(3)forhearingandreportingoffindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw. Theonlyissueraisedinthisappealiswhethertheevidencesupportsthetrialcourtsawardofpermanentpartialdisability.Weconcludethatitdoesandaffirmthedecision. Theplaintiff,MaryW.Scott,athenfiftysixyearoldclericalworker,injuredherselfinSeptember1992whenshefellbecausethebackofhersecretarialchaircameoff.ShecameunderthecareofDr.GregLanford,aneurosurgeon.Hehospitalizedherforafewdaysandthentreatedherconservatively.Shereturnedtoworkforseveralmonthsandthenleftherjob,butthereisnoexplanationintherecordastothecauseofhertermination. Dr.Lanfordhadtreatedtheplaintiffbeforeforthesamecondition.Infact,heoperatedonherbackinOctober1991toattempttorepairdegenerativechangesindiscsC3throughC7.Followingthatsurgery,theplaintiffreturnedtowork.  Theemployersargumentisstraightforward.Theplaintiffsconditionwasnoworseafterthefallthanitwasbeforethefall. Dr.Lanfordfoundtheplaintifftobeinaboutthesameconditionafterthefallasshewasbeforethefall.WhenaskedtocomparetheplaintiffsconditiononJuly30,1992thelasttimehesawherbeforeherworkinjurytoherconditiononAugust30,1993thelasttimehesawheraftertheworkinjurythedoctorresponded: Ireallydontseealotofdifferenceinthetwovisits.Dr.Lanfordconcludedthatshehada14%impairmentbeforethefallanda14%impairmentafterthefall. Theplaintifftestifiedthatshehadneckpainbeforethefallandneckpainafterthefall.Shetestifiedthatshehadarmpainbeforethefallandafterthefall.Herarmpainhadimprovedbythetimeofthefall,andmaybeevengoneawaytherecordisunclearandherarmpainhadimprovedorevengoneawaybythetimeDr.Lanfordlastsawherafterthefallatwork. Thedefendantspositionoverlooksonecriticalbitofevidence.Afterher1991surgery,Dr.Lanfordreleasedtheplaintifftoreturntoworkwithnorestrictions.Afterher1992fall,however,thedoctorrecommendedpermanentrestrictionsnofrequentliftingovertenpoundsandnooccasionalliftingovertwentypounds.Heinstructedtheplaintifftominimizerepetitiveoverheadwork.Andmostimportantly,heinstructedtheplaintiffnottostand,Ϝwalk,orsitmorethansixhoursinadayandnottostand,walk,orsitmorethantwohourscontinuously. Sincehergraduationfromhighschoolin1954,theplaintiffhasalwaysworkedinclericalandsecretarialjobs.Forseventeenyears,shewasasecretaryandreceptionistatWerthanIndustries.AtCuttersExchange,sheworkedinaccountspayable.AtR.L.PolkCompany,shewasasecretary.Whensheinjuredherself,shewasworkinginbilling.EachofthesejobsrequiredsittinglongerthanallowedbyDr.Lanfordsrestrictions. Beforeheronthejobinjury,theplaintiffcouldperformnormalhouseholdchoressuchascookingandcleaning.Aftertheinjury,shecandoverylittleofit.Shehaslostthefeelinginherrightthumbandafinger.Shehasnogrip.Theplaintiff,whosecredibilityisnotquestioned,testifiedthatshecannotperformtheclericaljobsthatshedidinthepast. ThedefendantspositionbaseduponDr.Lanfordsbeforeandafterdiagnosisisnotunreasonable.Butthereisotherevidence,includingDr.Lanfordsrestrictions,restrictionsthathedidnotimposebeforethefallatwork.Weconcludethatthejudgmentofthetrialcourtshouldbeaffirmed.Costsaretaxedtothedefendantappellant.       ____________________________       RobertS.Brandt,SeniorJudgeCONCUR:________________________________AdolphoA.Birch,Jr.,ChiefJustice________________________________JoeC.Loser,Jr.,SpecialJudge    J.1;+'b|U`  `@J@ INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE@ ATNASHVILLEMARYW.SCOTT,    } DAVIDSONCIRCUIT      } No.93C2627Below Plaintiff/Appellee   }      } Hon.MariettaM.Shipley,vs.      } Judge      }KENNYPIPE&SUPPLY,INC.and }ROYALINSURANCECOMPANYOF }AMERICA,     } No.01S019607CV00140      } Defendants/Appellants  } AFFIRMED.@ JUDGMENTORDER  ThiscaseisbeforetheCourtupontheentirerecord,includingtheorderofreferraltotheSpecialWorkers'CompensationAppealsPanel,andthePanel'sMemorandumOpinionsettingforthitsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw,whichareincorporatedhereinbyreference.  Whereupon,itappearstotheCourtthattheMemorandumOpinionofthePanelshouldbeacceptedandapproved;and  Itis,therefore,orderedthatthePanel'sfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflawareadoptedandaffirmed,andthedecisionofthePanelismadethejudgmentoftheCourt. ` ` X  CostswillbepaidbyDefendants/AppellantsandtheirSurety,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary.  ITISSOORDEREDonApril25,1997.       PERCURIAM̛