ÿWPCÄ ÷n“i~ÏÌþݹ¼?x)¡#‘Y•'ŸÎ.f}zOï¹mOJa~ÏYÊÒêí||ýö §(¤%¨«´Èœ®¿‹¬˜¹ß8Ò´ˆ9TIb *vð¡)?”‘ÒÍ­ìÃî@Ppð€HÉ:!¯eÑA ÇþÛ›°|'ðõ;•oSл–Jn¸1tØ ì”v Á~®p%£'‡:½û®S xj—Y¡€åFÅ+ÌÆnð‰¢¿W «ŒLÆA²—6@4Î7¹øâ?UDî™®€›Ý 6Ç…<˜ªÏ9óZœ9}ÒG“ìq½êŸKDÏbL¨P,´÷o]ÔÕ S XçE µ¿?TãýæâŽ4Ü~¤ÖÄ-õbŸÑÄD¿‚.öŸ¤¡‰”3p¬ ù4°[ýýø”zÆ”YBåHåzšm–ŸPŽöðƽBØZÄvm>Ul0d44Ë‹ jŽìr;X²-€Þ'´jÉåÝØ}-à1GAá¡_›xÊâc=&Ä>>$›uAÕ0 žž’k?U…qª¤þ3sÈäáÔÆÁmnß•oˆå½<{ǵsƒŸ/Xë¸Ødžû®T¿±ÃúÈå qÁš²Œ“ƒ ÿ Å˜j´vL·½)‘nÇÓhè4``#!@UNa %¯ 0(µU:Ýw 4 / > U :F 0l€ 0Dì U:0 U:j N¤ ¦ ¨ U:¼ Nö mø < U:K ^ … … … … … … … … … … … … … … B‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ AQ® Æÿ 0DÅ 0D  0DMM D3‘˜HP LaserJet 8000 DN PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular{Z='3|x, øð AZ"Arial Regular((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó, øð AZ"Arial Regular, øð AZ"Arial Regular  Ý ƒ[¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€X!ýXXXÔÔ€ŠXX!ýÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X!ýXŠÔÐ  ÐÌOctober€6,€1999ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAxÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial RegularÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ 2Ý ƒ[¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€X €XXXÔÔ€ÿ¦XX €ÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X €Xÿ¦ÔÐ  ÐÌOctober€6,€1999Ð ˜˜ ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.Ð dd ÐAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAxÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regularz–G'L  dZ[\]_Cþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó%%%%'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€X!ýXXXÔÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÑTR[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÔ_Ô€à@PPDàò òIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@­ ­ DàSPECIAL€WORKERSðð€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELˆÌà@ÀÀ*DàAT€JACKSONˆÌà@ûû$Dà(July€12,€1999€Session)òòˆÐ tÄ ÐÌÌÌÌóóWILLIE€LANE€SHANNON,à@DD/Dàˆà p à)Ð  ` Ðà@DD/Dàˆà p à)Ìà ` àPlaintiff/Appellee,à@DD/Dàˆà p à)Ð è 8  Ðà@DD/Dàˆà p à)à È àBENTON€CHANCERYÐ Ô$  Ðv.à@DD/Dàˆà p à)Ð À  Ðà@DD/Dàˆà p à)à È àNO.€02S01„9902„CH„00013Ð ¬ü  ÐSIPCO€SERVICES€&€MARINE,€INC.€andà@DD/Dàˆà p à)Ð ˜è  ÐAMERICAN€HOME€ASSURANCE€COMPANYà@DD/Dàˆà p à)à È àHON.€C.€CREED€MCGINLEY,Ð „Ô  Ðà ` àà@DD/Dàˆà p à)à È àà  àJUDGEÐ pÀ Ðà ` àDefendants/Appellants.Ô‡X!ýXXX!ýÔà@DD/Dàˆà p à)Ð \¬ Ðó óÌÔ#†X!ýXXX!ýª#Ôò òÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTSóó:à h àà À àà  àà p àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ð V ÐÌFRANK€THOMASó óà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àò òCHARLES€L.€HICKSó óÐ Þ. Ðò òHAL€W.€WILKINSó ó€€€€€€€à h àà À àà  àà p à9€North€Court€SquareÐ Ê ÐLeitner,€Williams,€Dooleyà h àà À àà  àà p àP.O.€Box€957Ð ¶ Ѐ€&€Napolitan,€PLLCà h àà À àà  àà p àCamden,€Tennessee€€38320Ð œì Ðßx€Y_B2.jz%ÿÄ`  `€€@ÿEEF` 8ttxP}‚ð Ä xß2300€First€American€Centerà À àà  àà p àÐ ‚Ò ÐNashville,€Tennessee€€37238ÌÌò òÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ššDàòòM€E€M€O€R€A€N€D€U€M€€€€O€P€I€N€I€O€NóóˆÐ l)¼$( ÐÌà@ÈÈ'DàòòMembers€of€Panelóó:ó óˆÐ D+”&* ÐÌà@#DàJustice€Janice€M.€HolderˆÌà@;;"DàSenior€Judge€F.€Lloyd€TatumˆÌà@££"DàSenior€Judge€L.€T.€LaffertyˆÌà@DD/Dàò òˆÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌMODIFIED€AND€REMANDEDÌÌÌF.€LLOYD€TATUM,€SENIOR€JUDGEÌÌÐ Ä;7< ÐÐ ~;Î6= ÐÔ_Ôó óÔ€ X €XXX €ÔÑ8€MXXdædÈ8Ñà@,Dàòòò òOPINIONó óóóˆÐ ° ÐÌÓÓÓ  Óà ` àThis€workersðð€compensation€appeal€was€referred€to€the€Special€WorkersððÐ |Ì ÐCompensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„Ð H˜ Ð225(e)(3)€(Supp.€1998)€for€hearing€and€reporting€to€the€Supreme€Court€of€findings€of€factÐ  d Ðand€conclusions€of€law.Ð à 0 Ðà ` àThe€standard€of€review€of€factual€issues€in€workersðð€compensation€cases€is€òòdeóó€òònovoóóÐ ¬ ü  Ðupon€the€record€of€the€trial€court€with€a€presumption€of€correctness,€unless€theÐ xÈ  Ðpreponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(2)€(1991€&Ð D”  ÐSupp.€1998);€òòHenson€v.€City€of€Lawrenceburgóó,€851€S.W.2d€809,€812€(Tenn.€1993).€€UnderÐ ` Ðthis€standard,€we€are€required€to€conduct€an€in„depth€examination€of€the€trial€courtððsÐ Ü, Ðfindings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law€to€determine€where€the€preponderance€of€theÐ ¨ø Ðevidence€lies.€€òòSeeóó€òòThomas€v.€Aetna€Life€&€Cas.€Co.óó,€812€S.W.2d€278,€282€(Tenn.€1991)Ð tÄ Ð(quoting€òòHumphrey€v.€David€Witherspoon,€Inc.óó,€734€S.W.2d€315€(Tenn.€1987));€òòKing€v.Ð @ ÐJones€Truck€Linesóó,€814€S.W.2d€23,€25€(Tenn.€1991).€€In€making€such€a€determination,€thisÐ  \ ÐCourt€must€give€considerable€deference€to€the€trial€judgeððs€findings€regarding€the€weightÐ Ø( Ðand€credibility€of€any€oral€testimony€received.€€òòTownsend€v.€Stateóó,€826€S.W.2d€434,€437Ð ¤ô Ð(Tenn.€1992);€òòThomasóó,€812€S.W.2d€at€283.€All€medical€evidence€consists€of€medicalÐ p!À  Ðreports€and€letters.€€This€Court€may€draw€its€own€conclusions€about€the€weight,€credibility,Ð <#Œ" Ðand€significance€of€such€evidence.€€òòSeiber€v.€Greenbrier€Indus.,€Inc.óó,€906€S.W.2d€444,€446Ð %X $ Ð(Tenn.€1995).€Ð Ô&$"& Ðà ` àThis€case€involves€chemical€burns€to€an€employeeððs€leg.€€After€hearing€all€of€theÐ  (ð#( Ðevidence,€the€trial€court€found€that€plaintiffððs€injury€should€not€be€confined€to€a€scheduledÐ l*¼%* Ðmember,€because€of€the€severe€damage€to€the€skin,€and€awarded€plaintiff€benefits€for€anÐ 8,ˆ', Ð80€percent€permanent€partial€disability€to€the€body€as€a€whole.€€Defendants€have€assignedÐ .T). Ðtwo€issues€for€our€consideration:€(1)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€that€plaintiffÐ Ð/ +0 Ðsuffered€an€injury€to€the€body€as€a€whole;€and€(2)€whether€the€trial€court€erred€inÐ œ1ì,2 Ðdetermining€plaintiffððs€vocational€disability€rating.€€The€plaintiff€argues€that€the€skin€is€aÐ h3¸.4 Ðseparate€organ€and€an€unscheduled€member,€so€injuries€to€the€skin€should€beÐ 45„06 Ðcompensated€under€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„207(3)(F)€governing€injuries€to€the€body€asÐ 7P28 Ða€whole.€€This€argument€is€based€largely€on€the€fact€that€the€medical€records€introducedÐ Ì84: Ðinto€evidence€rated€plaintiffððs€injuries€to€the€body€as€a€whole€under€the€AMA€Guidelines.€Ð ° ÐThe€record€is€silent€as€to€the€disability€rating€of€the€leg.€€We€find€that€the€plaintiffððsÐ |Ì Ðimpairment€is€restricted€to€the€leg.Ð H˜ Ðà ` àAt€the€time€of€trial,€plaintiff,€Willie€Lane€Shannon,€was€a€45€year€old€father€of€threeÐ  d Ðwith€a€tenth€grade€education,€a€G.E.D.,€and€two€years€of€basic€community€college€courses.€Ð à 0 ÐHis€prior€employment€included€jobs€in€production,€construction€and€painting,€at€a€sawmill,Ð ¬ ü  Ðand€as€an€owner€of€a€painting€company.€€Plaintiff€began€working€for€defendant,€SipcoÐ xÈ  ÐServices€and€Marine,€Incorporated€(Sipco)€in€1994.€€Sipco€is€a€company€that€engages€inÐ D”  Ðcontract€maintenance€for€large€companies.€€While€employed€by€defendant,€plaintiffððs€jobÐ ` Ðresponsibilities€included€commercial€painting,€waterblasting,€and€sandblasting.€€On€OctoberÐ Ü, Ð13,€1996,€plaintiff€accidentally€put€his€right€leg€into€sulphuric€acid€while€preparing€cells€atÐ ¨ø Ða€company€that€produces€the€metal€for€batteries.€€Plaintiffððs€leg€was€severely€burned€belowÐ tÄ Ðthe€knee€and€on€the€top€portion€of€the€foot.€€He€was€subsequently€hospitalized€for€nineÐ @ Ðdays€and€received€skin€grafts€for€the€chemical€burns.€€Plaintiff€returned€to€light€duty€workÐ  \ Ðon€January€3,€1997,€with€restrictions€on€climbing€and€exposure€to€chemicals,€but€heÐ Ø( Ðexperienced€extreme€leg€pain€two€or€three€days€after€his€return€to€work.€€As€a€result,Ð ¤ô Ðplaintiffððs€doctor€limited€him€to€five€hours€work€per€day.€€During€this€period,€exposure€toÐ p!À  Ðchemicals€caused€quarter€size€blisters€to€appear€on€the€area€of€plaintiffððs€leg€where€theÐ <#Œ" Ðgrafting€had€occurred.€€He€was€also€treated€at€the€Vanderbilt€Pain€Clinic.€€Plaintiffððs€last€dayÐ %X $ Ðat€Sipco€was€November€24,€1997,€when€he€was€sent€home,€because€he€could€not€workÐ Ô&$"& Ðmore€than€five€hours€per€day.€€Since€leaving€defendantððs€employ,€plaintiff€had€applied€for€Ð  (ð#( Ðjobs€at€two€companies.€€He€attempted€to€work€at€a€convenience€store€but€was€unable€toÐ l*¼%* Ðstand€on€his€leg€continuously.€€€€Ð 8,ˆ', Ðà ` àPlaintiff€testified€that€he€cannot€walk€very€far€without€experiencing€a€stingingÐ .T). Ðsensation€between€his€right€knee€and€foot.€€At€other€times,€his€right€leg€will€suddenly€giveÐ Ð/ +0 Ðway,€causing€him€to€fall.€€Plaintiff€stated€that€he€cannot€stand€or€sit€for€over€an€hour€withoutÐ œ1ì,2 Ðcausing€pain€in€his€leg.€€His€right€ankle€causes€him€pain€when€he€squats,€and€his€left€legÐ h3¸.4 Ðbecomes€sore€from€using€it€to€compensate€for€his€injured€right€leg.€€Cold€and€heat€causeÐ 45„06 Ðplaintiff€discomfort€as€well.€€The€pain€medication€that€he€takes€three€times€per€day€makesÐ 7P28 Ðplaintiff€feel€ð ðdrunk,ðð€which€prevents€him€from€driving€a€car€and€affects€his€ability€toÐ Ì84: Ðconcentrate€and€perform€daily€activities.€€He€is€also€no€longer€able€to€play€sports€with€hisÐ ° Ðchildren.€€Plaintiff€testified€that€he€would€not€be€able€to€work€in€his€previous€occupationsÐ |Ì Ðwith€his€restrictions.€Ð H˜ Ðà ` àPlaintiffððs€wife€testified€at€the€trial€that€her€husband€is€more€depressed,€short„Ð  d Ðtempered,€and€withdrawn€than€before€his€accident.€€In€addition,€he€is€no€longer€active€withÐ à 0 Ðthe€children€and€has€no€social€life.€€She€stated€that€sitting€and€walking€cause€her€husbandÐ ¬ ü  Ðpain.€€€€€€€Ð xÈ  Ðà ` àThe€C„32,€letters,€and€medical€records€from€Dr.€Ronald€M.€Barton,€plaintiffððs€plasticÐ D”  Ðsurgeon€at€The€Vanderbilt€Clinic,€were€offered€at€trial.€€Dr.€Barton€released€plaintiff€onÐ ` ÐOctober€2,€1997,€with€recommendations€that€he€should€not€return€to€his€previousÐ Ü, Ðemployment.€€In€a€letter€dated€August€25,€1997,€Dr.€Barton€stated€that€plaintiff€underwentÐ ¨ø Ðan€impairment€measurement€on€August€20,€1997,€which€showed€no€limb€lengthÐ tÄ Ðdiscrepancy,€no€gait€derangement,€no€ankle€impairment,€and€no€joint€ankylosis.€€In€thatÐ @ Ðletter,€Dr.€Barton€stated€that€the€plaintiff€had€15€percent€impairment€to€the€body€as€a€whole.€Ð  \ ÐOn€October€24,€1997,€Dr.€Barton€stated€that€the€plaintiff€had€25€percent€impairment€to€theÐ Ø( Ðbody€as€a€whole€pursuant€to€Table€2,€p.€280,€of€the€AMA€Guidelines,€since€plaintiffððs€skinÐ ¤ô Ðwas€affected.€€He€restricted€plaintiff€from€standing€or€walking€over€three€hours,€sitting€moreÐ p!À  Ðthan€six€hours€per€day,€and€from€stooping.€€Dr.€Barton€placed€environmental€restrictionsÐ <#Œ" Ðon€plaintiffððs€exposure€to€chemicals,€which€cause€his€skin€grafts€to€break€down.€€PlaintiffÐ %X $ Ðcan€occasionally€climb,€balance,€kneel,€crouch,€crawl,€and€twist.€€He€has€unlimited€abilityÐ Ô&$"& Ðto€push,€pull,€reach,€handle,€finger,€feel,€see,€hear,€and€speak.€Ð  (ð#( Ѐ€à ` àDr.€W.€H.€Blackburn,€a€family€practitioner,€saw€plaintiff€on€December€18,€1996,€andÐ l*¼%* Ðrated€him€at€20€percent€disability€to€the€body€as€a€whole,€but€stated€that€it€ð ðis€too€soon€toÐ 8,ˆ', Ðestimate€his€permanent€disabilityðð€and€deferred€to€Dr.€Barton.Ð .T). Ðà ` àOn€August€13,€1997,€Dr.€Stephen€M.€Pratt,€a€plastic€surgeon€to€whom€plaintiff€wasÐ Ð/ +0 Ðreferred€for€a€second€opinion,€assigned€plaintiff€a€5€percent€impairment€to€the€body€as€aÐ œ1ì,2 Ðwhole,€based€on€the€AMA€Guidelines,€Class€I,€skin€problems.€€€Ð h3¸.4 Ðà ` àÔ‡X €XX X €ÔAs€to€whether€the€disability€should€be€assessed€as€a€scheduled€member€or€to€theÐ 45„06 Ðbody€as€a€whole,€our€courts€have€consistently€held€that€an€injury€confined€to€a€scheduledÐ 7P28 Ðmember€is€governed€exclusively€by€the€statute€controlling€awards€to€scheduled€members.€Ð Ì84: ÐòòWells€v.€Sentry€Ins.€Co.,óó€834€S.W.2d€935,€937€(Tenn.€1992);€òòRayburn€v.€Hutton€Stone,€Inc.óó,Ð ° ÐNo.€01S01„9201„CV„00002,€1992€WL€174258,€at€*2€(Tenn.€July€27,€1992)Ô#† X €XXX €ó0#Ô;€òòLock€v.€NationalÐ |Ì ÐUnion€Fire€Ins.€Co.€of€Pa.óó,€809€S.W.2d€483,€486€(Tenn.€1991);€òòReagan€v.€Tennessee€Mun.Ð H˜ ÐLeagueóó,€751€S.W.2d€842,€843€(Tenn.€1988).€€Establishing€the€schedules€for€certainÐ  d Ðenumerated€portions€of€the€body€is€the€prerogative€of€the€legislature,€and€the€fact€that€aÐ à 0 Ðdisability€rating€can€be€translated€to€the€body€as€a€whole€by€the€AMA€Guidelines€does€notÐ ¬ ü  Ðalter€the€rule€that€the€statutory€schedules€control.€€òòWellsóó,€834€S.W.2d€at€938;€Ô‡X €XX X €ÔòòReaganóó,€751Ð xÈ  ÐS.W.2d€at€844.€à  àÐ D”  Ðà ` àTennessee€Code€Annotated€Ô#† X €XXX €i5#ÔÔ‡ X €XX X €ÔððÔ#† X €XX X €&6#ÔÔ‡X €XX X €Ô€50„6„207(3)(F)€provides€in€pertinent€part:Ô#† X €XXX €l6#ÔÐ ` ÐÓÓà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#àAll€other€cases€of€permanent€partial€disability€not€aboveÐ Ü, Ðenumerated€shall€be€apportioned€to€the€body€as€a€whole€.€.€.€Ð  Ðò òThe€benefits€provided€by€this€paragraph€shall€not€beÐ ¨ø Ðawarded€in€any€case€where€benefits€for€a€specific€loss€areÐ ŽÞ Ðotherwise€provided€in€this€chapter.€€ó ó(emphasis€added)Ðtĸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌÓÓà ` àThis€section€applies€only€to€those€disabilities€that€are€not€ð ðenumeratedðð€in€theÐ @ Ðschedules€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€50„6„207(3)(A)(ii).€€The€loss€of€a€leg€is€anÐ  \ Ðð ðenumeratedðð€injury€in€the€schedules.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„207(3)(A)(ii)(o).€€Therefore,Ð Ø( Ðplaintiffððs€argument€that€his€injury€should€be€assessed€to€the€body€as€a€whole€must€fail,Ð ¤ô Ðbecause€our€courts€have€repeatedly€stated,€and€the€statute€expressly€provides,€that€anÐ p!À  Ðinjury€to€a€scheduled€member€is€controlled€exclusively€by€the€benefits€provided€forÐ <#Œ" Ðscheduled€members€in€ðð€50„6„207.€€òòLockóó,€809€S.W.2d€at€486.€€€€€€Ð %X $ Ðà ` àIn€the€present€case,€we€find€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€assessing€plaintiffððs€disabilityÐ Ô&$"& Ðto€the€body€as€a€whole.€€The€trial€judge€stated€in€his€ruling:Ð  (ð#( ÐÓ³8Óà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#àBut€the€Court€feels€that€the€anatomical€rating€for€this€type€ofÐ l*¼%* Ðinjury€that€goes€to€the€body€as€a€whole€because€of€the€severeÐ R+¢&+ Ðdamage€to€the€skin€is€an€appropriate€rating.€€And€as€a€result,Ð 8,ˆ', Ðthe€Court€uses€that€anatomical€rating€as€the€basis€for€makingÐ -n(- Ðits€vocational€rating.€.€.€.€But€using€that€anatomical€rating€as€theÐ .T). Ðbasis€[20„25€percent],€the€Court€can€go€anywhere€up€to€sixÐ ê.:*/ Ðtimes€to€the€body€or€at€least€five€times.€.€.€.€€The€Court€feelsÐ Ð/ +0 Ðthat€his€vocational€rating€is€80€percent€to€the€body€as€a€whole.ж0,1¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌÓÓà ` àIn€€òòGeneral€Smelting€and€Refining,€Inc.€v.€Whitefieldóó,€579€S.W.2d€857€(€Tenn.€1979),Ð ‚2Ò-3 Ðthe€claimant€sustained€serious€burns€to€his€right€arm,€left€hand,€right€foot,€and€left€leg€thatÐ N4ž/5 Ðrequired€skin€grafting,€thus€sustaining€permanent€injuries€to€four€scheduled€members.€€TheÐ 6j17 ÐSupreme€Court€stated€that€claimantððs€burned€skin€was€not€as€durable€and€was€moreÐ æ7639 Ðsusceptible€to€disease€after€grafting€and€that€his€injuries€were€to€four€scheduled€members,Ð ²95; Ðnamely,€both€arms€and€both€legs.€€However,€the€workersðð€compensation€statutes€provideÐ ° Ðthat€injuries€to€three€or€more€scheduled€members€are€to€be€assessed€to€the€body€as€aÐ |Ì Ðwhole€rather€than€to€scheduled€members,€and€the€Court€so€held.€€òòId.óó€at€859.€€In€the€opinionÐ H˜ Ðon€petition€to€rehear,€it€is€clear€that€the€injuries€to€the€four€members€were€to€the€skin.€€òòId.óóÐ  d ÐÓs?Óà ` àÓÓIn€the€unreported€case€of€òòRayburn€v.€Hutton€Stone,€Inc.óó,€No.€01S01„9201„CV„Ð à 0 Ð00002,€1992€WL€174258€(Tenn.€July€27,€1992),€the€employee€sustained€an€injury€to€theÐ ¬ ü  Ðskin€of€his€left€foot€and€heel.€€The€trial€judge€awarded€compensation€based€on€an€injury€toÐ xÈ  Ðthe€body€as€a€whole.€€On€appeal,€the€employer€argued€that€the€trial€judge€erred€in€basingÐ D”  Ðthe€award€on€disability€to€the€body€as€a€whole€instead€of€to€a€scheduled€member.€€TheÐ ` ÐSupreme€Court€affirmed,€solely€on€the€ground€that€there€was€credible€evidence,€supportedÐ Ü, Ðby€expert€medical€testimony,€that€the€employee€was€experiencing€low€back€problems€asÐ ¨ø Ða€result€of€his€difficulty€in€walking.€€Since€the€back€is€a€non„scheduled€member,€the€CourtÐ tÄ Ðheld€that€the€trial€judge€properly€based€the€award€on€disability€to€the€body€as€a€whole.€€òòId.óóÐ @ Ðat€*2„3.€€Ð  \ Ðà ` àWe€have€no€evidence€in€the€case€before€us,€either€expert€or€lay,€that€plaintiff€hasÐ Ø( Ðsuffered€any€permanent€impairment€to€any€part€of€his€body,€except€for€the€right€leg.€Ð ¤ô ÐTennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€50„6„204(d)(3)€requires€physicians€to€utilize€one€of€the€twoÐ p!À  Ðguidelines€mentioned€therein€only€for€the€purpose€of€determining€the€ò òdegreeó ó€of€anatomicalÐ <#Œ" Ðimpairment.€€The€guidelines€cannot€be€used€to€alter€the€statutory€schedules€of€TennesseeÐ %X $ ÐCode€Annotated€ðð€50„6„207€as€fixed€by€the€General€Assembly.€€The€damage€to€the€skinÐ Ô&$"& Ðon€plaintiffððs€leg€is€very€disabling,€but€the€disability€is€to€the€leg,€a€scheduled€member,€andÐ  (ð#( Ðcompensation€must€be€based€on€disability€to€the€leg.€€The€plaintiff€has€cited€no€authorityÐ l*¼%* Ðfor€the€proposition€that€injury€to€the€skin€of€a€scheduled€member€is€an€injury€to€the€body€asÐ 8,ˆ', Ða€whole.€€In€our€independent€research,€we€have€found€none.Ð .T). Ðà ` àWe,€therefore,€hold€that€the€trial€courtððs€judgment€that€plaintiffððs€injury€caused€aÐ Ð/ +0 Ðdisability€to€the€body€as€a€whole€is€erroneous.€€We€hold€that€benefits€should€be€calculatedÐ œ1ì,2 Ðpursuant€to€the€schedule€in€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€50„6„207(3)(A)(ii)(o)€governingÐ h3¸.4 Ðthe€loss€of€a€leg€and€we€sustain€the€first€issue.€€à È àÐ 45„06 Ðà ` àOn€our€òòdeóó€òònovóóo€review,Ô€ X €XX X €Ô€we€have€assessed€the€evidence€above€summarized€as€toÐ 7P28 Ðthe€plaintiffððs€disability€to€the€leg.€€We€find€that€plaintiff€has€a€90€percent€permanent€Ô_ÔpartialÐ Ì84: Ðdisability€to€the€right€leg€and€adjudge€accordingly.€€Our€decision€moots€the€second€issue,Ð ° Ðand€it€is€Ô_ÔpretermittedÔ_Ô.Ð |Ì Ðà ` àÔ‡X €XX X €ÔJudgment€of€the€trial€court€is€modified€as€stated€herein,€and€the€case€is€remandedÐ H˜ Ðto€the€trial€court€for€further€proceedings€that€may€be€necessary,€consistent€with€this€opinion.€Ð  d ÐEach€party€will€pay€one„half€the€costs€of€this€appeal.Ð à 0 Ðà ` àÔ#† X €XXX €}O#ÔÔ‡X €XX X €ÔÌÌÓÓà€ðð€%àòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóˆÐ D”  Ðà€&&1€%àF.€LLOYD€Ô_ÔTATUMÔ_Ô,€SENIOR€JUDGE€€€ˆÐ *z  ÐÌÌÌÌCONCUR:Ð ¨ø ÐÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð @ ÐóóJANICE€M.€HOLDER,€JUSTICEÐ &v ÐÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ ¾ ÐL.€T.€Ô_ÔLAFFERTYÔ_Ô,€SENIOR€JUDGEÐ ¤ô Ðà ` àÐ  Š Ú ÐÑ` °ÑÔ#† X €XXX €òP#ÔÔ‡X €XX X €Ôßx€Y_B2.jza`  `€€@ÿE3Á ` ttx0k` ¥ A xßà@ý ý DàÔ‡»F »XX €ÔIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ `  ÐÌà@ff*DàAT€JACKSONÔ#†X €X»»F DT#ԈРx  ÐÌÌÓ-°,X…XDp X°œX-ÓWILLIE€LANE€SHANNON,à0 œ à)à È àBENTON€CHANCERYÐPðœ€%œ€% ÐÓ<°,X°D‚, X°,X…XDp X<Óà œ à)à È àNO.€97„3953Ð 6Ö ÐÓ<°,°Dp X°,X°D‚, X<Óà ` àPlaintiff/Appellee,à œ à)à È àÐ ¼ Ðà ` àà œ à)à È àHon.€C.€Creed€Ô_ÔMcGinleyÔ_Ô,Ð ¢ Ðvs.à ` àà œ à)à È àChancellorÐ èˆ  Ðà ` àà œ à)Ð În  ÐÔ_ÔSIPCOÔ_Ô€SERVICES€&€MARINE,€INC.€andà0 œ à)дT œ€%œ€% ÐAMERICAN€HOME€ASSURANCE€COMPANY,à œ à)à È àNO.€02S01„9902„CH„00013Ð š:  Ðà ` àà œ à)Ð €  Ðà ` àDefendants/Appellants.à œ à)à È àMODIFIED€AND€REMANDEDÐ f  ÐÌÌÌà@öö(DàÔ‡»F »XX €ÔJUDGMENT€ORDERÔ#†X €X»»F ØX#ԈРþž ÐÌÓÓÌÓ6°À°` p’X°,°Dp X6Óà ¸ àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€the€entire€record,€including€the€order€ofÐ ¼\ Ðreferral€to€the€Special€Workers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel,€and€the€Panel'sÐ ˆ( ÐMemorandum€Opinion€setting€forth€its€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law,€which€areÐ T!ô Ðincorporated€herein€by€reference.Ð  #À Ðà ¸ àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€Memorandum€Opinion€of€theÐ ì$Œ ÐPanel€should€be€accepted€and€approved;€andÐ ¸&X  Ðà ¸ àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Panel's€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€lawÐ „($" Ðare€adopted€and€affirmed,€and€the€decision€of€the€Panel€is€made€the€judgment€of€the€Court.Ð P*ð $ Ðà ¸ àCosts€will€be€paid€one„half€by€each€party,€for€which€execution€may€issue€ifÐ ,¼"& Ðnecessary.Ð è-ˆ$( Ðà ¸ àIT€IS€SO€ORDERED€this€6th€day€of€October,€1999.Ð ´/T&* ÐÌà ¸ àà È àà  àà x àà Ð àà (# à¼à ¸ àà È àPER€Ô_ÔCURIAMÔ_ÔÐ 5¸+0 ÐÌÐ °8P/4 ÐÔ_Ô‡ÌÔ#† X €XXX €›S#ÔÔ‡X €XX X €ÔÔ_ÔÌà ¸ àÌÔ#† X €XXX €F^#ÔÔ‡X €XX X €Ôà ¸ àÌà ¸ àÌà ¸ àÔ#† X €XXX €¦^#ÔÔ‡X €XX X €ÔÌà ¸ àÔ#† X €XXX €_#ÔÔ‡X €XX X €ÔÌà ¸ àÔ#† X €XXX €]_#ÔÔ‡X €XX X €ÔÌà ¸ à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð À` Ðà ¸ à€Ð Œ, Ðà ¸ à€€€Ð Xø Ðà ¸ à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à È à€€€€€Ô#† X €XXX €¬_#ÔÐ $Ä Ðà ¸ à