WPC  2Y ZB 0 HP LaserJet 8000 Series PSXN\  PXPЫXN\  PXP(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularXXZ2PXP,cAZ"Arial RegularX2PP,cAZ"Arial RegularXZ2PXP,cAZ"Arial RegularXXZ2PXP,cAZ"Arial RegularXi2PP,  AZ"Arial RegularXZ2PXP,  AZ"Arial RegularXi2PP,  AZ"Arial RegularXZ2PXP,  AZ"Arial RegularXP XXXZ2P XP,  AZ"Arial RegularXXZ2P XP,cAZ"Arial RegularXh2P P,cAZ"Arial RegularXZ2P XP,cAZ"Arial RegularX2PP,cAZ"Arial RegularXZ2PXP,cAZ"Arial RegularXh2PP,cAZ"Arial RegularXZ2PXP,cAZ"Arial RegularXXZ2PXP,  AZ"Arial RegularX2  3|x X #XZ2PXP# A'Legal dddd 1 dddd 1 !` 8` 8#2PP# FILED#XZ2PXP# November 29, 1999 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate Court Clerk  PD IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE DSPECIAL WORKERS COMPENSATION APPEALS PANEL D*AT JACKSON lD%(August 13, 1999 Session)Ã TRAVIS MILTON WATT,DD/ ) DD/ )  Plaintiff/Appellee, DD/ ) MADISON CHANCERY DD/ )  v. DD/ ) NO. 02S019809CH00087 DD/)  LUMBERMANS MUTUAL CASUALTYDD/ ) HON. JOE C. MORRIS INSURANCE COMPANY, #XZ2PXP#DD/)  #i2PP#) #XZ2PXP#Defendant/Appellee,#i2PP#DD/) #XZ2PXP#DD/) and LARRY BRINTON, DIRECTOR OF ) THE DIVISION OF WORKERS DD/ ) COMPENSATION, TENNESSEE DD/) DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, SECOND DD/) INJURY FUND, DD/) DD/) Defendant/Appellant.DD/) FOR THE APPELLEE : FOR THE APPELLANT: T. J. EMISON, JR.PAUL G. SUMMERS P. O. Box 13Attorney General and Reporter Alamo, Tennessee 38001  KATHLEEN W. STRATTON  Assistant Attorney General DIANNE STAMEY DYCUS Deputy Attorney General 2nd Floor, Cordell Hull Building 425 Fifth Avenue North Nashville, Tennessee 37243 D! M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N D(Members of Panel: D& Justice Janice M. Holder ;D$Senior Judge F. Lloyd Tatum D%Senior Judge L. T. Lafferty REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTIONS F. LLOYD TATUM, SENIOR JUDGE Č#P X#  #XZ2P XP#D+ OPINION ă The plaintiff, Travis Milton Watt, brought suit against Lumbermans Mutual Casualty Insurance Company, the insurance carrier for the plaintiffs employer, Hamilton Hill Shopping Center, and the Second Injury Fund for workers compensation benefits, alleging total and permanent disability to the body as a whole. The plaintiff alleged that on August 24, 1996, while employed by Hamilton Hills as a carpenter, he fell from a ladder severely injuring his right foot and the lower part of his right leg. In 1971, the plaintiff injured his right hand; his small finger and ring finger were amputated. He had limited use of the other two fingers on his right hand. After hearing the evidence, the court took the case under advisement and by letter informed the interested parties thereto, that as a result of both injuries, the plaintiff suffered total and permanent disability to the body as a whole. The trial judge made no other findings and ordered that a decree be prepared in accordance with Bomely v. MidAmerica Corp., 970 S.W.2d 929 (Tenn. 1998). The attorney for the plaintiff prepared a decree which was not approved by the defendants, stating that the plaintiff was entitled to recover permanent total disability benefits and ordered that each defendant pay fifty (50) percent of the total award. The trial judge signed this decree. The Second Injury Fund filed another proposed decree which it asked the trial judge to sign, but this matter was never heard by the court. The trial judge did not make sufficient findings to enable counsel to draft a decree in accordance with Bomely, Id. There was no finding, and no statement in the decree, as to whether judgment was being rendered pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated  506208(a) or  506208(b). In subsection (a) cases, it is important for trial courts to make an explicit finding of fact regarding the extent of vocational disability attributable to the subsequent or last injury, without consideration of any prior injuries. Bomely, at page 934. Also See Hill v. CNA Insurance Co., 985 S.W.2d 959 (Tenn. 1999). In the event the award is made pursuant to section (b), the trial judge will so state, specifying the percentage of permanent disability to the whole body with respect to the hand injury and also to the foot and leg injury. See Burris v. Cross Mt. Coal Co.,798 S.W.2d 746 (Tenn. 1990) and Sims v. Bitumonous Cas. Corp., 798 S.W.2d 751 (Tenn. 1990). After making these findings, the Chancellor may make appropriate changes in the final judgment. It is hoped that these instructions can be complied with promptly. It results that we must remand with instructions herein specified. The two defendants will equally share the costs. `P%- `%.F. LLOYD TATUM, SENIOR JUDGE CONCUR:    JANICE M. HOLDER, JUSTICE   L. T. LAFFERTY, SENIOR JUDGE  `  #XZ2P XP# D#h2P P#IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE fD)AT JACKSON#XZ2P XP#у ,X` Dp x (#%'0*,.8135@8: