WPC 9# .UN9 % 0N 0bw@4 0J 0T 0^+ 0h   } C 0r 0|{ 0 0} 1u  AQ 0j 0@ 0DC 0d D/ B B7 D3TU>B)DC AM1U*~J?v~1vHP LaserJet 4 PlusHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLH'"  Z 6Times New Roman Regular(&y$   (a(2Q$ y!     XX    0  - - {DӀ   E 5D""(3|x baker v. CKR Industries - Brandt Opinion  ' ' IB011C20IB011C2 .   2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  ԁLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52@ 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)!"#$&C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(B3w$ y!     ("$    ($$   1  P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X((' dxd dP Pd'''''dxd<  9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d11117Border 1dd!#2C << G<  9p`(Arial @ !  #d#00   ""  44   YYY FILED4XJanuary17,1997CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk   5 !#d#00   ""  44   YYY FILED4XJanuary17,1997CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk  PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva ! . 00          \RA'\  \RA'\7Vdd7    !R352A1-j|`  `@Rߛ @ 0 INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE@ SPECIALWORKERSCOMPENSATIONAPPEALSPANEL@ ATNASHVILLE0@ 0(October22,1996Session)0 0 LARRYRICHARDWILLIAMS, )      ) Plaintiff/Appellant,  ) DAVIDSONCHANCERY      )      ) Hon.EllenHobbsLyle,VS.      ) Chancellor      )      ) SCOTTBOLT&SCREWCO.,and ) No.01S019604CH00077STATEAUTOINSURANCECO., )      ) Defendants/Appellees.  )FortheAppellant:     FortheAppellees:PhillipH.Miller     BryanEssarySarahStein      GIDEON&WISEMANNashville,Tennessee    Nashville,Tennessee@ 0  MEMORANDUMOPINION 0@ MembersofPanel:0 0 FrankF.Drowota,III,AssociateJustice,SupremeCourt    RobertS.Brandt,SeniorJudge    JoeC.Loser,Jr.,SpecialJudgeAFFIRMED        Brandt,Judgeǜ  ћ  0@ MEMORANDUMOPINION 0 ThisworkerscompensationappealhasbeenreferredtotheSpecialWorkersCompensationAppealsPaneloftheSupremeCourtinaccordancewithTenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(3)forhearingandreportingoffindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw. TheplaintifffiledsuitallegingthatabrownreclusespiderbithimwhilehewasatworkonApril15,1993.Thetrialcourtdeniedhisclaim.Becausetheevidencedoesnotsupporttheplaintiffsclaim,thetrialcourtdecisionisaffirmed. Theplaintifftestifiedthathisleftlegstarteditchingatworkatabout2:00p.m.onApril15ormaybeApril19,heisnotsurewhich.Atanyrate,inhisdepositiontheplaintifftestifiedthatthenextthinghenoticedwasasorekneethefollowingmorning,buthedidnotpaymuchattentiontoit.Hetestifieddifferentlyattrial.Theplaintiffandhisliveingirlfriendbothtestifiedtheysawaredmarkonhiskneewhenheundressedafterworktheafternoontheitchingstared. Inanyevent,thepainstartedthenextmorning.Theplaintiffwenttoworkandworkedalmostallday.Thepaingotbadtowardquittingtime,andtheemployerencouragedtheplaintifftoseeadoctor.Hedid,andeventuallycameunderthecareoftwoVanderbiltdoctors,PhillipWolinsky,anorthopedicsurgeon,andBruceShack,aplasticsurgeon.Neitherofthemknowwhetherabrownreclusespiderbitecausedtheplaintiffswound.Butitwasseriouswhatevercausedit,andtheplaintiffsufferspermanentimpairmentasaresultofit. Thedoctorstestimonycontradictstheplaintiffsclaimthatabrownreclusespiderbithimatwork.Dr.Wolinskydoesnotknowmuchaboutbrownreclusespiderbites,andwhatlittlehedoesknowandsharedinhisdepositiondoesnotsupporttheplaintiffsclaim.AccordingtoWolinsky,theliteraturereferredtobytheplaintiffscounselindicatesthatwhileabitemaynotcauseanyimmediatepain,somelocalizedpaindevelopswithinanhourorso.̀ Dr.Shackdoesknowaboutspiderbites.Hehastreatedmanypatientsforthemandhaswrittenaboutthem.Hetestifiedthatitisnottypicalforabitetobeseveralhoursoldandforitchingtobetheonlysymptom.Itwouldbeunusual,hesaid,fortheretobenopainfromabrownreclusespiderbitewithinseveralhours. Theplaintiffscontendsthespiderbithimatworkseveralhoursbeforehenoticedtheitchingat2:00p.m.Heandhisgirlfriendbothsaythatthepainstartedthenextmorning.Andeventhen,itwasnotbadenoughtokeeptheplaintifffromworkingallday.Basedonthemedicalevidence,itseemsimprobable,ormaybeevenimpossible,thatabrownreclusespiderbittheplaintiffatworkbefore2:00p.m. Asnoted,neitherdoctorevendiagnosedtheplaintiffswoundasabrownreclusespiderbite.Andnoonehaseverseenorcomplainedofspiderswheretheplaintiffworked.Theemployercalledinexterminatorsaftertheplaintiffsproblemarose,andtheexterminatorsettrapsforspiders.Nospidersturnedup. Inthefinalanalyses,itispossiblethatabrownreclusespiderbittheϜplaintiff,anditispossiblethatthespiderbithimatwork.Butallindicationsarethatifabrownreclusespiderbittheplaintiff,itdidnothappenatwork.Thetimingofthemanifestationofsymptomsissimplyinconsistentwiththeplaintiffsclaim. Thetrialcourtsdecisiondenyingworkerscompensationisaffirmedattheplaintiffscosts.       ____________________________        RobertS.Brandt,JudgeCONCUR:________________________________FrankF.Drowota,III,AssociateJustice________________________________JoeC.Loser,Jr.,Judge    J36;+'b|)`  `@J@ INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE@ ATNASHVILLELARRYRICHARDWILLIAMS,  } DAVIDSONCHANCERY      } No.942314IBelow Plaintiff/Appellant  }      } Hon.EllenHobbsLyle,vs.      } Chancellor      }SCOTTBOLT&SCREWCO.and } No.01S019604CH00077STATEAUTOINSURANCECO., }      } Defendants/Appellees  } AFFIRMED.@ JUDGMENTORDER  ThiscaseisbeforetheCourtupontheentirerecord,includingtheorderofreferraltotheSpecialWorkers'CompensationAppealsPanel,andthePanel'sMemorandumOpinionsettingforthitsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw,whichareincorporatedhereinbyreference.  Whereupon,itappearstotheCourtthattheMemorandumOpinionofthePanelshouldbeacceptedandapproved;and  Itis,therefore,orderedthatthePanel'sfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflawareadoptedandaffirmed,andthedecisionofthePanelismadethejudgmentoftheCourt. ` ` X  CostswillbepaidbyPlaintiff/AppellantandSuretyforwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary.  ITISSOORDEREDonJanuary17,1997.       PERCURIAM̛