WPCo #[KȻV@ES}3ϐX"u.m=Z.| !R> wqβc=932Mkԣúx/5phh}iנ; 1.yw_88Ʀ/;GhЇԢ՗꾡."2)Y G *8/O.>K24]tO2l%GZpOH>SrsLeu:nd N=HoSgxwyN*!"5"(Jf 94Ux̪m}b#ԨsnKE6Jh"<{se_(l/N}u"fPlL,Y)>=Z n S4ifķ;g1]aEGIJEM= !*lybU%>\ 0< 0 0 lr 0< 0< 0V 0: { 0@ K D+U Ao!@ o-5 0E#UN %M(N ^ "w.42F mH_%Nw zyUNEUN 0cccc B`` 0} D333 0Kff AS 0 0D A\  `&Times New Roman' IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE "Unknown User"0Unknown User .   61 $4Heading 1      XXX64 '4Heading 2       XXX 6 4Heading 3       <:Default Para6 4Body Text 0A .Footer (#A7X` hp x (#A:8Page Number q  ,)..      XQ4XXXXQ4XXXQ4  _$ (#X$   * (# X*  ,      (2,$ h!..      XQ4XXXXQ4XXXQ4   'dxd &Draw Object <<=8C HKKKKWPC p R513%)+ .- ) ) WPC p R513%)+ .- ) ) #|x(rh$..      XFXXXXFXXXFHP LJ 4000/4050 PCL 5e,,,,0(uH Z6Times New Roman RegularXs+ j-+6rtyBartULevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5&C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt("  Z6Times New Roman Regular(9 Z 6Times New Roman Regular(G2I$ h!..      XQ4XXXXQ4XXXQ4      0  XQ4XXXQ4 d(3 $ h!..      XQ4XXXXQ4XXXQ4  VVVV'dxd( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3 $ h!..      XQ4XXXXQ4XXXQ4  ($$   1   X[ &OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK h!..      XQ4XXXXQ4XXXQ4  _        XX8Q4XXdd8  GXXQ48GINTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE  G8     8G& 0   SPECIALWORKERSCOMPENSATIONAPPEALSPANEL6  Ԍ  Ќ  88  ATNASHVILLE > #G8c#July2001Session  ] XQ4XG'0*GXXQ4      &    LISAANNETTE_BARLAR_Ԁv.JOHNSONCONTROL  Ԍ  O Ќ  XQ4XG  GXXQ4 '      &    XQ4XGDirectAppealfromtheCircuitCourtforGilesCountyQ  -Ԍ  g Ќ         "  No.10071,Hon.StellaL._Hargrove_,Judge"Y  AԌ  M Ќ   ' Ee-  pXXQ4 o_[$~  Rp@"0 d RE7 R R j -  XQ4Xp      &  8  No.M200002423WCR3CVMailedOctober15,20018  WԌ   Ќ   e  'o    `     h FiledNovember19,2001    -  pXXQ4o_[$~  Rp@"0 d RE7S R R Sj -  XQ4Xp  ThisworkerscompensationappealhasbeenreferredtotheSpecialWorkersCompensation o AppealsPanelinaccordancewithTenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(3)forhearingandreporting U offindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw.Indeterminingwhethertheemployeesasthmawas ; anoccupationaldisease,thetrialcourtconsideredconflictingmedicaltestimony,theemployees ! workplaceconditions,andtheemployeeshistoryofsmoking.Theemployercontendsthetrial  courterred(1)whenitheldthattheplaintiffsasthmaaroseoutofandinthescopeofher  employment,(2)infindingthattheplaintiffsasthmaispermanent,and(3)inawardingthe  employee45%permanentpartialdisabilitytothewholebody.ThePanelhasconcludedthatthe i judgmentofthetrialcourtshouldbeaffirmed. O       Tenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(3)AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourt k Affirmed.݌ Q Ќ  Gayden,Sp.J.deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichDrowota,J.,andLoser,Sp.J.  joined.   $ (#X$  H.` hp x (# XHu  u݌̌! XX(#!  JosephWardHenry,Jr.,Henry,Henry&Speer,Pulaski,TN,fortheappellant,JohnsonControl. "  RichardThomasMatthews,Matthews&Tisher,Columbia,TN,fortheappellee,LisaAnnette K$" Barlar. 1% #       &  ^  MEMORANDUMOPINION^  }Ԍ &g!$ Ќ     '&      Theemployee/appellee,LisaAnnetteBarlar,wasemployedwithJohnsonControl,from '3#& 1991untilFebruary2001.Ms.Barlaristhirtyfiveyearsold,hasaninthgradeeducation,has ($' notobtainedaGED,andhasnospecialtrainingorskills.Shealsosmokedapproximatelyapack )$( andahalfofcigarettesadayfromtheagesoffifteentothirtytwo,quittinginNovember1998. *%) HerpositionswithJohnsonControlinvolvedvariousaspectsoftheproductionoffoam {+&* automobileseatsandheadrests,whichexposedhertofoamdust,chemicals,andfumes.Ms. a,'+ Barlarbeganexperiencingrespiratoryproblemsin1994whileusinga hotknifetocutthrough G-(, _fabriccoveringtheseats.Inthatprocess,blacksmokewasemittedmakingitdifficultforherto  breatheandcausingherhearttorace.Ms.Barlarwashospitalizedforapproximatelyoneweek  andmissedworkforaboutthreemonthsduetothisincident.After1994,shecontinually | experienceddifficultybreathingwhileexposedtothefoamdust,chemicals,andfumesatwork b andwashospitalizedonthreeotheroccasions;thelasthospitalizationleadingtoherdecisionto H stopworking.ThetrialcourtfoundthatMs.Barlarhadacompensableoccupationaldisease . ~ withafortyfivepercentpermanentpartialdisability.  d Y    Appellatereviewisdenovoupontherecordofthetrialcourtbutthereisapresumption  0 ofcorrectnessofthefindingsoffact,unlessthepreponderanceoftheevidenceisotherwise.    Tenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(2).PursuanttoTenn.CodeAnn.506301,anoccupational    diseaseisadiseasethat arisesoutofandinthecourseofemployment.Thecausationofa   diseasemustbeestablishedbyexpertmedicaltestimonyinallbutthemostobviouscases. x  Thomasv.AetnaLife&Cas.Ins.Co.,812S.W.2d278,282(Tenn.1991).Inthiscase, ^  however,thereisconflictingmedicaltestimonyabouttheexistenceandcauseoftheemployees D  disease. *z      Priortoheremployment,Ms.Barlarwasingoodhealthwithnorespiratoryorpulmonary F problems.ShebeganvisitingDrs.HaneyandHeflinforherrespiratoryproblemsin1994after , herfirsthospitalization.In1998,Dr.Heflinprescribedmedicationsandaninhalerfora  diagnosisof asthmaticbronchitissecondarytosmokingandpollutionexposure.Hestatedthat  herconditionprobablyhadmultiplecausesincludingherworkplaceandhersmoking.In1999,  Dr.Haneyformallydiagnosedoccupationalasthmaandopinedthathercondition more t probablythannotaroseoutofheremployment.Hegaveherpermanentrestrictionsofworking Z inacleanairenvironment.In2000,however,Ms.BarlarsawDr.Bluhmattherequestof @ JohnsonControl.Dr.BluhmexaminedMs.Barlar,reviewedhermedicalrecords,andstatedthat &v shehadnoevidenceoflungdiseaseanddidnothaveoccupationalasthmaeventhoughshemay  \ havesomeformofasthma. B     Trialjudgeshavediscretionintheweightinwhichtheyconsiderconflictingmedical  testimony.Ormanv.WilliamsSonoma,Inc.,803S.W.2d672,676(Tenn.1996).Indoingso,  thejudgeistoconsiderthe qualificationsoftheexperts,thecircumstancesoftheirexamination,   theinformationavailabletothem,andtheevaluationoftheimportanceofthatinformationby p!  otherexperts.Id.Absolutemedicalcertaintyisnotrequiredforanemployeetoestablish V"! medicalcausation.Tindallv.WaringParkAssn,725S.W.2d935,937(Tenn.1987). <#" Additionally,anyreasonabledoubtastocausationistobeconstruedinfavoroftheemployee. "$r# Hallv.AuburntownIndus.,684S.W.2d614,617(Tenn.1985).Inthiscase,thetrialjudgegave %X $ moreweighttothetestimonyofDr.Heflin,whichissupportedbythefactthatheexaminedthe %>!% employeeonseveraloccasionsandhadknowledgeofthechemicalsandpollutantspresentinthe &$"& productionoffoamseats.Furthermore,theMaterialSafetyDataSheetsindicatethatMs.Barlar ' #' wasexposedtosubstancesduringheremployment,suchasAromaticIsocyanate,thatcancause (#( asthma.Inlightofthesereasonsandinthepresumptionofcorrectnessofthetrialcourt,we )$) affirmthefindingthattheemployeesdiseaseiscompensable. l*%* !    ThePanelalsoaffirmsthetrialcourtsfindingoffortyfivepercentpermanentpartial 8,', disabilitytothebodyasawhole.Although,astheemployerindicates,Ms.Barlars_condition -n(- improveswhensheremainsawayfromwork,Dr._Heflin_Ԁtestifiedthatherconditionwouldbe  permanentaslongasshewasexposedtoaggravatingsubstances.Histestimonyissupportedby  Ms._Barlar_stestimonythatshemustavoidstrongodorsandchemicalssuchasperfumes,air | fresheners,andcleaningproducts.Moreover,theMaterialSafetyDataSheetsindicatethat b chronicexposureto_isocyanates_,presentduringMs._Barlar_semployment,canleadtopermanent H chemicalasthma. . ~   Oncethecauseandpermanencyofadiseasehavebeenestablished,courtsmayconsider  J manypertinentfactors,including jobskills,education,age,training,durationofdisabilities,  0 anatomicaldisabilitiesestablishedbymedicalexperts,andlocaljobopportunitiesforthe    disabledforthepurposeofevaluatingtheextentofanemployeesdisability._Crossno_Ԁv._Publix_    ShirtFactory,814S.W.2d730,732(Tenn.1991).Inthepresentcase,Dr._Heflin_,followingthe   AmericanMedicalAssociationGuidelines,foundthattheemployeehadanimpairmentratingof x  twentyfivepercent.Thisrating,combinedwiththefactsthatMs._Barlar_Ԁisthirtyfiveyearsold, ^  hasonlyaninthgradeeducation,hasnotobtainedaGED,andhasnospecialskillsortraining, D  supportthetrialcourtsfindingofafortyfivepercentpermanentpartialdisability. *z    Therefore,aftercarefulreviewoftherecord,thisPanelaffirmstheholdingsofthetrial F court.Costsofappealaretaxedtotheappellant,JohnsonControl. ,  0  0` (#(#0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#______________________________________t(#(#   0 ` 0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#HAMILTONV._GAYDEN_,JR.,JUDGE Z(#(# GXXQ48'Q4'XXdXXd8  @@7 7 INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE  SPECIALWORKERSCOMPENSATIONAPPEALSPANEL   #XQ4XG@3# GXXQ4LISAANNETTE_BARLAR_v.JOHNSONCONTROL#XQ4XGV4#    @@ CircuitCourtforGilesCounty   @@No.10071   @@*AV() ` dE<C` A D  No.M200002423_WC_ԄR3CVFiledNovember19,2001 9  AV() ` dE<` A U       GXXQ4#XQ4XG6#6  JUDGMENT GXXQ4#XQ4XG07#    GXXQ4#XQ4XG7#GXXQ4#XQ4XG7#)XQ4XXXQ4  ThiscaseisbeforetheCourtupontheentirerecord,includingtheorderofreferraltothe  SpecialWorkersCompensationAppealsPanel,andthePanelsMemorandumOpinionsetting x forthitsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw,whichareincorporatedhereinbyreference. ^   Whereupon,itappearstotheCourtthattheMemorandumOpinionofthePanelshouldbe *z acceptedandapproved;and `   Itis,therefore,orderedthatthePanelsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaware , adoptedandaffirmed,andthedecisionofthePanelismadethejudgmentoftheCourt.    Costswillbepaidbytheappellant,JohnsonControl,forwhichexecutionmayissueif  necessary. t   ITISSOORDERED. @!!    `     h     PER_CURIAM_ $( %   #XQ4XX)XQ48#