WPCi c.`y&_&}~V$X;YaFkbJQȎ㑯eKGnĢ/̞~B7k̩֙$ƴbSp2lPQ\CTc~~h[-:ˮ.̲*-ɉ\)z\ba) "wNwģۣQmlAGZyp;txzD?h,XE0>9A7|:W |-kOꎗ3E@}[19b %\b 0jUFN^ @wL4P zd  m #  _ %  %N 0DVErUNtN z>>UNb^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 0ffff B QQ 0n D3 D-E 0Krr AS 0 0Dz A (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regularl- db,+00 C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xUHP LJ 4000/4050 PCL 5e,,,,0Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5  RAo$      1  X]X  _ XX]ԀThenameddefendant,BrentwoodServicesAdministrator,Inc.,wasdismissedfromthecase.#X]X ~#(#$  0   L RAo$      2  X]X  _ XX]ԀThecomplaintalsoalleged, DuetoPlaintiffsworkwithandfortheabovenamedDefendant/Employers,  Plaintiffreceivedanewinjuryorinjuriesand/orcumulative,consecutive,exacerbationsand/oraggravationofinjuries t and/orconditions,andthatduetoPlaintiffsworkwithsaidDefendant/Employers,Plaintiffcontinuestoreceivenew 8 injuriesand/orconditionsand/orissustainingcumulative,consecutive,exacerbationand/oraggravationofinjuriesand/or L conditionallcausedbyhisemploymentandworkfortheaforementionedDefendant/Employers.#X]X ~#(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularC:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt(9 Z 6Times New Roman Regular- -(|G2Ao$ !.89dd8         0  XQX d(|3b$ !.89dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3b$ !.89dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8qdd8     _q8]XXdd8  q@@7 7 INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE  SPECIALWORKERSCOMPENSATIONAPPEALSPANEL & @@ATNASHVILLE#q# L July25,2002Session "r X]Xq #qXX]#GEORGETHOMASARGOv.BRENTWOODSERVICES  p ADMINISTRATORS,INC.,etal.X]Xq  4  @@ DirectAppealfromtheCircuitCourtforWarrenCounty 4  @@No.7346CharlesD._Haston_,Judge  p  @@*AV) ` dE<` A 4  No.M200102821_WC_ԄR3CVMailedOctober10,2002 /  #qXX]#X]XqFiledNovember12,2002  AV) ` dE<` A       Thisworkers'compensationappealhasbeenreferredtotheSpecialWorkers'CompensationAppeals  PaneloftheSupremeCourtinaccordancewithTenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(3)forhearingand  reportingtotheSupremeCourtoffindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw.Inthisappeal,#qXX]#X]Xqthe v employer#qXX]#X]XqԀinsists#qXX]L#X]XqԀ(1)thetrialcourterredinfailingtodismisstheclaimbasedonthe"lastinjurious b injurydoctrine,"(2)theawardofpermanentpartialdisabilitybenefitsbasedon37.5percenttothe N bodyasawholeisexcessive,and(3)thetrialcourterredincommutingtheawardtoalumpsum. : Theemployeeinsistsheisentitledtoreceivebenefitsfromoneinsurerortheother.Asdiscussed &v below,thepanelhasconcludedthejudgmentshouldbeaffirmed. b t   Tenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(2001Supp.)AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCircuit : Court Affirmed  &     #qX]͖#X]X.qJoeC.Loser,Jr.,Sp.J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichJaniceM.Holder,J.,and   JamesL._Weatherford_,Sr.J.,joined. !  Stacey_Billingsley_ԀCason,Nashville,Tennessee,fortheappellant,LocalGovernmentWorkers' v#" CompensationFund b$# BarryH.Medley,_McMinnville_,Tennessee,fortheappellee,GeorgeThomasArgo :&!%    MEMORANDUMOPINION #qXX] #X]Xq (b#'   #qXX]i #X]Xq  Theemployeeorclaimant,Argo,initiatedthiscivilactiontorecoverworkerscompensation ):%)  benefitsforanallegedworkrelatedinjuryoccurringonJune2,1999,whilehewasworkingforthe *&&* _employer,WarrenCountySanitationDepartment. #  1      ׀T #  2      ׀ThecausewasdismissedastoWarrenCountys   workerscompensationadministrator,BrentwoodServicesAdministrators,Inc.LocalGovernment  WorkersCompensationFund,WarrenCountysinsurerinJune1999,wasaddedasathirdparty  defendant.LocalGovernmentWorkersCompensationFundcontendedtheaccidentoccurredafter t itscoveragelapsedonJuly1,1999.Onthatissue,summaryjudgmentwasissuedinfavorofWarren ` County,therebeingundisputedproofthattheaccidenthappenedinJune,beforecoveragelapsed. L  Theproprietyofthatorderisnotdirectlyquestionedinthisappeal. 8    AfteratrialoftheremainingissuesonOctober22,2001,thetrialcourt,findingtheinjury  ` tohaveoccurredonJune2,1999,asalleged,awarded,amongotherthings,permanentpartial  L  disabilitybenefitsbasedon37.5percenttothebodyasawhole.LocalGovernmentWorkers  8  CompensationFundhasappealed. $    X]XXX]ForinjuriesoccurringonorafterJuly1,1985,appellatereviewisdenovoupontherecord   ofthetrialcourt,accompaniedbyapresumptionofcorrectnessofthefindingsoffact,unlessthe   preponderanceoftheevidenceisotherwise.#X]XXX]y#Tenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(2)(2001Supp.).X]XXX]ԀThe   reviewingcourtisrequiredtoconductanindependentexaminationoftherecordtodeterminewhere p thepreponderanceoftheevidencelies.#X]XXX]#X]XXX]ԀWingertv.GovernmentofSumnerCounty,908S.W.2d921, \ 922(Tenn.1995).#X]XXX]#X]XXX]Thestandardgoverningappellatereviewoffindingsoffactbyatrialcourt H requirestheSpecialWorkersCompensationAppealsPaneltoexamineindepthatrialcourts 4 factualfindingsandconclusions.#X]XXX]ͥ#X]XXX]ԀGAFBldg.Materialsv.George,47S.W.3d430,432(Tenn.2001).  p #X]XXX]#X]XXX]Wherethetrialjudgehasseenandheardthewitnesses,especiallyifissuesofcredibilityandweight  \ tobegivenoraltestimonyareinvolved,considerabledeferencemustbeaccordedthose H circumstancesonreview,becauseitisthetrialcourtwhichhadtheopportunitytoobservethe 4 witnessesdemeanorandtoheartheincourttestimony.#X]XXX]#X]XXX]Longv.TriConInd.,Ltd.,996S.W.2d   173,178(Tenn.1999).#X]XXX]Z#X]XXX]ԀThetrialcourtsfindingswithrespecttocredibilityandweightofthe   evidencemaygenerallybeinferredfromthemannerinwhichthecourtresolvesconflictsinthe  testimonyanddecidesthecase.#X]XXX]#X]XXX]Tobittv.Bridgestone/Firestone,Inc.,59S.W.3d57,61(Tenn.  2001).#X]XXX],#X]XXX]ԀTheappellatetribunal,however,isaswellsituatedtogaugetheweight,worthand  significanceofdepositiontestimonyasthetrialjudge.#X]XXX]#X]XXX]Walkerv.SaturnCorp.,986S.W.2d204,207 l (Tenn.1998)#X]XXX]Ͱ#X]XXX].Theextentofaninjuredworkersvocationaldisabilityisaquestionoffact.#X]XXX]D#X]XXX]Sealsv. X  England/CorsairUpholsteryMfg.,984S.W.2d912,915(Tenn.1999).#X]XXX]#X]XXX]ԀWherethemedical D! testimonyinaworkerscompensationcaseispresentedbydeposition,thereviewingcourtmaymake 0"  anindependentassessmentofthemedicalprooftodeterminewherethepreponderanceoftheproof #l! lies.#X]XXX]̈́ #X]XXX]WhirlpoolCorp.v.Nakhoneinh,69S.W.3d164,167(Tenn.2002).#X]XXX]!# $X"  $D #   Mr.Argois53yearsoldwithatenthgradeeducationandnospecialskillsortraining.He  hasworkedfortheWarrenCountySanitationDepartmentsince1995.WhileatworkonJune2,  1999,heclimbedontopofanopentopcontainerboxforthepurposeofrollingatarpacrossit.His  feetslippedandhefellonhisrightsideacrossadryer,injuringhisbackandrightshoulder.He t wenttoanemergencyroomthefollowingweekend.Theemergencyroomphysicianattendinghim ` testifiedthathiscomplaintswereconsistentwithlumbarstrain,forwhichthatdoctorprescribeda L  musclerelaxant. 8    OnJune22,1999,theclaimantreportedtoDr.DonaldArms,anorthopedicsurgeonin  ` McMinnville.Dr.ArmsprovidedconservativecareuntilJanuary13,2000,whenhereleasedthe  L  claimantwithnopermanentimpairmentandnorestrictions.Whenhissymptomspersisted,his  8  attorneyreferredhimtoDr.RobertLandsberg. $    Dr.Landsbergexaminedtheclaimantononeoccasion,September18,2000.Theclaimant   relatedtothisdoctorahistoryofhavinginjuredhisbackandrightshoulderonJune2,1999,as   allegedinhiscomplaint.Afterexaminingtheclaimant,Dr.Landsbergopinedthat,asaresultofthat   accident,Mr.Argowaspermanentlyimpaired,whichimpairmentheratedat18percenttothewhole p personforthebackinjuryand7percenttothewholebodyfortheshoulderinjuryusingappropriate \ guidelines.Theshoulderinjurywasdiagnosedasonewhichcausednerveimpingement. H   Theclaimant,whotestifiedhisinjuriesoccurredonJune2,1999,continuestoworkfor  p WarrenCountySanitationasatruckdriver,butworkcausesanincreaseofhissymptoms.He  \ testifiedthatheisabletomanagemoneyandthathishouseandcararepaidfor.Histestimonywas H corroboratedbyhiswife. 4   Theappellantcontendsthetrialcourtshouldhavedismissedthecomplaintbecauseofthe    lastinjuriousinjuryrule.X]XXX]Whereanemployeeispermanentlydisabledasaresultofacombination  oftwoormoreaccidentsoccurringatdifferenttimesandwhiletheemployeewasworkingfor  differentemployers,theemployerforwhomtheemployeewasworkingatthetimeofthemostrecent  accidentisgenerallyliableforpermanentdisabilitybenefits.#X]XXX],#ԀSeeBaxterv.Smith,211Tenn.347, l 364S.W.2d936(1962)anditsprogeny.X]XXX]Thesamedoctrineapplieswheretheemployeespermanent X  disabilityresultsfromsuccessiveinjurieswhiletheemployeeisworkingforthesameemployer,but D! theemployerhaschangedinsurancecarriers.Thecarrierwhichprovidedcoverageatthetimeofthe 0"  lastinjuryisliableforthepaymentofpermanentdisabilitybenefits.#X]XXX]O.#ԀSeeGlobeCo.v.Hughes,223 #l! Tenn.37,442S.W.2d253(1969)anditsprogeny.X]XXX]Where,however,workaggravatesapreexisting $X" conditionmerelybyincreasingpain,thereisnoinjurybyaccident.#X]XXX]͋0#Kellermanv.FoodLion,Inc., $D # 929S.W.2d333,335(Tenn.1996).Givingduedeferencetothefindingsofthetrialcourt,we %0!$ cannotsaytheevidencepreponderatesagainstthetrialcourtsfindingthattheclaimantsinjuries &"% occurredonJune2,1999. '#&   Theappellantfurthercontendstheawardofpermanentpartialdisabilitybenefitsisexcessive. )$( X]XXX]Theextentofaninjuredworkerspermanentvocationaldisabilityisaquestionoffact.#X]XXX]63#Storyv. |*%) LegionIns.Co.,3S.W.3d450,456(Tenn.1999).X]XXX]Inmakingsuchdeterminations,thetrial_courts h+&* aretoconsiderallpertinentfactors,includinglayandexperttestimony,theemployeesage,  education,skillsandtraining,localjobopportunitiesforthedisabled,andcapacitytoworkattypes  ofemploymentavailableintheclaimantsdisabledcondition.#X]XXX]*4#ԀTenn.CodeAnn.506241(a)(1).  Consideringthepertinentfactors,totheextenttheywereestablishedbytheproof,andgivingdue t deferencetothefindingsofthetrialcourt,wecannotsaytheevidencepreponderatesagainstthetrial ` courtsaward. L    Theappellantfinallycontendsthetrialcourterredincommutingtheawardtoalumpsum. $ t X]XXX]Permanentdisabilitybenefitsarenormallypaidperiodicallybutmaybecommutedtooneormore  ` lumpsumpayment(s)onmotionofanypartysubjecttotheapprovalofthecourthavingjurisdiction  L  ofthecase.Lumpsumpaymentsshall,intheaggregate,amounttoasumofallfutureinstallments  8  ofcompensation.Indeterminingwhethertocommuteanaward,thecourtsmustconsider(1)whether $  thecommutationwillbeinthebestinterestoftheemployee,and(2)theabilityoftheemployeeto   wiselymanageandcontrolthecommutedaward.#X]XXX]7#Tenn.CodeAnn.506229(a).X]XXX]ԀWhetherto   commuteaworkerscompensationawardtoalumpsumisdiscretionarywiththetrialcourt,andthe   trialcourtsdecisionwillnotbedisturbedonappealunlessthetrialcourtsdecisionamountedtoan   abuseofdiscretion.#X]XXX]ͬ:#_Edmonds_Ԁv.WilsonCounty,9S.W.3d106,109(Tenn.1999).X]XXX]ԀFromour p independentexaminationoftherecord,wecannotsaythetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretionby \ commutingtheawardtoalumpsum. H   Fortheabovereasons,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.Costsonappealaretaxed  p toTheLocalGovernmentWorkersCompensationFund.  \ #X]XXX]̀<#   `     h     ___________________________________     `     h     JOEC.LOSER,JR.     _qXX]  @@7 7 INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE  SPECIALWORKERSCOMPENSATIONAPPEALSPANEL  #X]Xq?# qXX]GEORGETHOMASARGOv.BRENTWOODSERVICES " ADMINISTRATORS,INC.,etal.#X]Xqc@#   6 @@ CircuitCourtforWarrenCounty  6 @@No.7346  " @@*AV) ` dE<` A   No.M200102821WCR3CVFiledNovember12,2002   AV) ` dE<h` A i       qXX]#X]XqB#B  JUDGMENT qXX]#X]Xq1C# <   qXX]#X]XqC#qXX]#X]XqC#X]XXX]  ThiscaseisbeforetheCourtupontheentirerecord,includingtheorderofreferraltothe d SpecialWorkersCompensationAppealsPanel,andthePanelsMemorandumOpinionsettingforth P itsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw,whichareincorporatedhereinbyreference. <   Whereupon,itappearstotheCourtthattheMemorandumOpinionofthePanelshouldbe  acceptedandapproved;and    Itis,therefore,orderedthatthePanelsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflawareadopted  andaffirmed,andthedecisionofthePanelismadethejudgmentoftheCourt. t   CostswillbepaidbyTheLocalGovernmentWorkers'CompensationFund,forwhich L  executionmayissueifnecessary. 8!    ITISSOORDERED. #`"    `     h     PERCURIAM &"&   #X]XXX]D#_