ÿWPCÛ h`ÁƒzÄ’ÔdëW{²FˆÈ#Ü—Ù4eíÞ"ÆÇÆ ˜Ð¥m›x,h7I­6ô¬Þ\®ÈÀt¦ùÄÀVnŒ¬4ý>Híämïn)uÖëé0f‹çÙï#›Bý ¿ë-SÆ6ðmãÒ]¶¤¸í6 Š“F¼®…A43 íVŠ''Ð) dö3&‹(±¢3›)/U­ÐWry5Rªºê`­ùdË&?OtjÙÙç¤x˜×'ƒÍÑ `©›”}×4Äû8ò0–önv2 ¬ú)í ºÎþ{ >ÍxÝ\i>¼Z”„âKs”»{!rP5櫜¥&ÎÁ¸>_ R¤¿“¨HØÔ˜úæt«\EcæÖý/º2muµîoð”®ó{‚+]*>l™ É[Ö.¶Ñrv8׿A’˜zöÃ@úö÷Í;Ê»c{n&“cCÒÿÓ(g¶Ekó´¢Dõ;Ybf;n'¢#>ž\MÀ©]@i•—Ïâ’:˜ù"¹J±ÏâÞØLp1…Pðs§f¥[õÜ!þC·¿w=|'€‘m„Ù ›CØýb‚g“Ik72’¢ŒÇ‹1~踆9À¢‘Änþ÷Y ³#Çn ÏØnà_eE@Ãæ·#Á %à ^ É 0ˆÕ U#N]w«4¯ zÃÒ= m UN7Æ…ÆKÆÆ×N¥N§N©E«N­ 0¤¯NSLUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUb¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡ 0ë©©©© B ”” 0¤± D3U D-ˆ 0Kµµ ASÆS 0¤ 0D½ A« A¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬ 0°+˜HP LaserJet 4,ü,,,,,ü0»®­n)L (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular˜L-(bk1,I¦ ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 (|3*$©©Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€..ÑÑ8€¾¤»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝC:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT- ù-(|G2•.$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€..ÑÑ8€¾¤»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€X¼ãX»»Ô d(|3*$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€..ÑÑ8€¾¤»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3*$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€..ÑÑ8€¾¤»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKXyúÿ  <<= 8ÀÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ(ˆ3Tr$««Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€..ÑÑ8€¾¤»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ d ÔÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¾¤»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€¼¾¤»»»ÔÑ8€¼ãXXdð»»d8ÑÓ  ÓÑ  Ñà@@7 7 ìàIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÐ ° ÐSPECIAL€WORKERSðð€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELÐ È Ðà@@ƒƒìàAT€JACKSONÐ à0 Ð(November€1999€Session)Ð øH ÐÔ‡X¼ãX»¼¾¤ÔÌò òÔ#†¼¾¤»XX¼ãâ#ÔJAMES€Ô_ÔBECTONÔ_Ô€òòóóv.€Ô_ÔGRISHAMÔ_Ô€CORPORATIONÔ‡X¼ãX»¼¾¤Ôó óÐ  P ÐÌà@@¼¼ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Shelby€CountyÐ  X Ðà@@ôôìàNo.€107007„2€€€€€€Floyd€Ô_ÔPeeteÔ_Ô,€Jr.,€ChancellorÐ ø H ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<Ç` AßÐ È  ÐÌNo.€W1999„00183„SC„WCM„CV€„€Mailed€August€2,€2000;€Filed€November€14,€2000Ð Ç  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<¦` AßÐ §÷  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÓ  ÓÔ‡ X}ÃXXX¼ãÔThis€is€an€appeal€by€James€E.€Ô_ÔBectonÔ_Ô€of€a€decision€by€the€trial€court€that€Ô_ÔBectonÔ_Ô€did€not€show€by€aÐ ¦ö Ðpreponderance€of€the€evidence€that€he€had€sustained€an€injury€by€accident€arising€out€of€and€in€theÐ ’â Ðscope€of€his€employment€with€Ô_ÔGrishamÔ_Ô€Corporation.€€He€presents€three€(3)€issues€for€review:€€1)Ð ~Î Ðwhether€the€Chancellor€erred€in€excluding€from€consideration€the€testimony€of€the€claimantððsÐ jº Ðtreating€physician.;€2)€whether€the€opinion€of€the€treating€physician€is€entitled€to€greater€weight€thanÐ V¦ Ðthat€of€a€consultant;€and€3)€whether€the€evidence€of€vocational€disability€preponderates€in€favor€ofÐ B’ Ðan€award€of€permanent€partial€disability€and€medical€payments€in€this€case.Ô#†X¼ãXX X}ÃÜ#ÔÔ#†¼¾¤»XX¼ã‘#ÔÔ‡X¼ãX»¼¾¤ÔÐ .~ ÐÓÐÓÌò òÓ  ÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225(e)€(1999)€Appeal€as€of€Right;Ð  Z ÐJudgment€of€the€Trial€Court€Affirmedó óÐ úJ ÐÓ ÓÌòòÓ  ÓGeorge€R.€Ellis,€Sp.€J.Ô#†¼¾¤»àX¼ãº#ÔÔ‡X¼ãX.¼¾¤Ôóó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJanice€M.€Holder,€J.,óó€and€òòF.Ð Ú* ÐLloyd€Ô_ÔTatumÔ_Ô,€Sp.€J.óó,€joined.Ð Ê ÐÌKaren€P.€Dennis€and€Steven€D.€Hawks,€of€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€James€Ô_ÔBectonÔ_Ô.Ð ª ú ÐÌRobin€H.€Ô_ÔRasmussenÔ_Ô,€of€Cordova,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Ô_ÔGrishamÔ_Ô€Corporation.Ð Š"Ú! ÐÌÔ  ÔÓ® ÓÓ  ÓMEMORANDUM€OPINIONÔ#†¼¾¤»XX¼ãô #ÔÐ j$º# ÐÌÓ  Óà  àÔ€X¼ãX»¼¾¤ÔThis€workersðð€compensation€appeal€was€referred€to€the€special€Workersðð€CompensationÐ r&Â!% ÐAppeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€pursuant€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€50„6„225(e)(3)€(1999)Ð b'²"& Ðfor€hearing€and€reporting€to€the€Supreme€Court€of€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.Ð R(¢#' ÐÌà  àThis€case€involves€a€claim€for€workersðð€compensation€arising€out€of€an€incident€on€JanuaryÐ 2*‚%) Ð30,€1995.€€The€trial€court€heard€the€evidence€on€October€8,€1998.€€On€October€26,€1998€theÐ "+r&* ÐChancellor€ruled€that€the€plaintiff€had€failed€to€show€causation.€€He€further€ruled€that€the€testimonyÐ ,b'+ Ðof€the€treating€physician€was€unreliable€and€should€be€discounted.€€The€plaintiff€appealed€and€raisedÐ -R(,ý Ðthe€following€issues€for€our€review:€€(1)€whether€the€chancellor€erred€in€completely€excludingÐ ° Ðtestimony€of€the€claimantððs€treating€physician€from€consideration;€(2)€whether€the€opinion€of€aÐ  ð Ðtreating€physician,€who€performed€surgery€and€observed€the€extent€of€anatomical€injury€fully,€isÐ à Ðentitled€to€greater€weight€than€that€of€a€consultant€who€saw€the€claimant€once,€and€had€noÐ €Ð Ðopportunity€to€directly€observe€the€surgical€procedure;€(3)€whether€the€evidence€of€vocationalÐ pÀ Ðdisability€preponderates€in€favor€of€an€award€of€permanent€partial€disability€and€medical€paymentsÐ ` ° Ðin€this€case.€€After€careful€review,€we€find€that€we€must€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€judgment.Ð P   ÐÌÔ  Ôà@cc!ìàò òSTANDARD€OF€REVIEWó óˆÐ 0 € ÐÌà  àThe€standard€of€review€of€factual€issues€in€workersðð€compensation€cases€is€de€novo€upon€theÐ `  Ðrecord€of€the€trial€court€with€a€presumption€of€correctness,€unless€the€preponderance€of€the€evidenceÐ P  Ðis€otherwise.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€50„6„225(e)(2)€(1999);€òòHenson€v.€City€of€Ô_ÔLawrenceburgÔ_Ôóó,€851€S.W.2dÐ ð@  Ð809,€812€(Tenn.€1993).€€Under€this€standard,€we€are€required€to€conduct€an€in„depth€examination€ofÐ à0  Ðthe€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law€to€determine€where€the€preponderance€of€theÐ Ð  Ðevidence€lies.€€See€òòThomas€v.€Aetna€Life€&€Ô_ÔCasÔ_Ô.€Co.óó,€812€S.W.2d€278,€282€(Tenn.€1991)€(quotingÐ À ÐòòHumphrey€v.€David€Ô_ÔWitherspoonÔ_Ô,€Inc.óó,€734€S.W.2d€314€(Tenn.€1987);€òòKing€v.€Jones€Truck€Linesóó,Ð ° Ð814€S.W.2d€23,€25€(Tenn.€1991).€€In€making€such€a€determination,€this€Court€must€give€considerableÐ  ð Ðdeference€to€the€trial€judgeððs€findings€regarding€the€weight€and€credibility€of€any€testimony€received.€Ð à ÐòòTownsend€v.€Stateóó,€826€S.W.2d€434,€437€(Tenn.€1992);€òòThomasóó,€812€S.W.2d€at€283.€€However,€theÐ €Ð Ðdetermination€of€factual€issues€in€the€present€case€involves€testimony€derived€solely€fromÐ pÀ Ðdepositions,€so€all€impressions€regarding€weight€and€credibility€must€be€drawn€from€the€contents€ofÐ `° Ðthe€documents,€rather€than€an€evaluation€of€live€witnesses.€€òòThomasóó,€812€S.W.2d€at€283.Ð P  ÐÌà  àTherefore,€this€court€may€draw€its€own€evaluation€of€live€witnesses.€€òòThomasóó,€812€S.W.2dÐ 0€ Ðat€283.€€This€court€may€draw€its€own€conclusions€about€the€weight,€credibility,€and€significance€ofÐ  p Ðsuch€testimony.€€òòÔ_ÔSeiberÔ_Ô€v.€Greenbrier€Indus.,€Inc.óó,€906€S.W.2d€444,€446€(Tenn.€1995).€€With€theseÐ ` Ðprinciples€in€mind,€we€turn€to€the€facts€of€this€case.Ð P ÐÌà  àOn€January€30,€1995€at€10:32€a.m.,€plaintiff€was€at€the€Baptist€Minor€Medical€Center€withÐ à0 Ðcomplaints€of€a€laceration€on€his€arm.€€Plaintiff€testified€that€the€alleged€accidental€injury,€which€isÐ Ð  Ðthe€subject€of€this€law€suit,€occurred€sometime€between€9:00€a.m.€and€10:00€a.m.€on€the€morning€ofÐ À! ÐJanuary€30,€1995,€and€that€he€worked€the€rest€of€the€day.€€The€proof€showed€that€plaintiff€did€notÐ °"  Ðwork€on€January€31,€1995.€€On€February€1,€1995,€at€7:15€a.m.,€he€reported€to€his€employer€that€heÐ  #ð! Ðhad€strained€his€back€lifting€a€box€of€screws.€€At€8:20€a.m.,€on€that€same€day,€plaintiff€went€to€theÐ $à" ÐBaptist€Minor€Medical€Center€complaining€of€severe€pain€in€his€back.€€On€February€4,€1995,€he€wentÐ €%Ð # Ðback€to€the€Baptist€Minor€Medical€Center€and€stated€that€he€was€injured€on€February€1,€1995.Ð p&À!$ ÐÌà  àPlaintiff€was€seen€by€Dr.€Robert€H.€Miller€on€February€6,€1995,€and€stated€that€the€backÐ P( #& Ðinjury€was€sustained€on€January€29,€1995.€€The€plant€was€closed€on€January€29,€1995.€€An€MRI€wasÐ @)$' Ðperformed€on€February€20,€1995,€which€showed€degenerative€disc€disease€at€L3„4,€L4„5€and€L5„S1,Ð 0*€%( Ðbut€no€signs€of€a€recurrent€disc.€€A€bone€scan,€performed€on€March€30,€1995,€was€negative.€€On€AprilÐ  +p&) Ð12,€1995,€a€diagnosis€was€made€by€Dr.€George€Woods€at€the€Campbell€Clinic€of€ð ðback€pain,€etiologyÐ ,`'* ÐÔ_Ôundetermined,€due€to€arthritis,€lumbar€spine€and€post€laminectomy€syndrome.ðð€€Plaintiff€was€referredÐ ° Ðto€Dr.€Keith€Atkins,€Ph.D.€on€June€13,€1995,€who€diagnosed€somatoform€pain€disorder€with€evidenceÐ  ð Ðof€symptom€amplification.€€After€making€an€additional€diagnosis€of€possible€arachnoiditis€on€JuneÐ à Ð20,€1995,€Dr.€Woods€referred€plaintiff€to€Dr.€James€R.€Feild,€neurosurgeon.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àPlaintiff€was€seen€by€Dr.€Feild€on€June€22,€1995,€and€he€rendered€an€opinion€that€PlaintiffÐ ` ° Ðhad€ð ðaging€of€the€joint€of€his€back.ðð€€On€October€31,€1995,€a€myelogram€was€performed€and€a€smallÐ P   Ðspinal€canal€was€found€and€he€ð ðdid€not€see€a€definite€ruptured€disc.ðð€€Electrical€tests€performed€onÐ @  ÐNovember€6,€1995,€showed€evidence€of€diabetic€neuritis.€€On€November€6,€1995,€Dr.€Feild€ð ðcouldÐ 0 € Ðnot€make€a€definitive€diagnosisðð€and€recommended€surgery€or€the€option€of€a€second€opinion.Ð  p  ÐÌà  àA€second€opinion€was€performed€by€Dr.€Feridoon€Parsioon€who€found€no€compressiveÐ P  Ðlesion,€no€nerve€damage,€and€no€ruptured€disc€or€tumor.Ð ð@  ÐÌà  àOn€December€26,€1995,€Dr.€Feild€performed€exploratory€surgery€which€revealed€growth€ofÐ Ð  Ðbone€over€one€of€the€nerve€roots€and€degenerative€lumbar€disc€disease.Ð À ÐÌÔ  Ôà@‹ ‹ ìàò òEXCLUSION€OF€THE€TESTIMONYˆÐ  ð Ðà@û û ìàOF€THE€TREATING€PHYSICIANó óˆÐ à ÐÌà  àThe€plaintiff€argues€that€the€Chancellor€erred€in€finding€that€Dr.€Feildððs€deposition€wasÐ pÀ Ðunreliable€even€though,€in€his€three€hour€long,€extremely€combative€deposition,€Dr.€Feild€admittedÐ `° Ðto€purposely€filing€an€inaccurate€report.€€In€this€deposition,€he€stated€that€the€form€that€he€filled€outÐ P  Ðwas,€in€his€own€opinion,€inaccurate.€€His€justification€for€this€was€because€Ð @ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àthe€insurance€company€you€represent€failed€to€take€the€responsibilityÐ  p Ðthat€was€necessary€and€incumbent€upon€them€to€provide€this€personÐ ` Ðmedical€care€which€he€deserved€and€which€is€the€subject€of€thisÐ P Ðlawsuit.€€Thatððs€the€reason€all€of€this€is€done,€is€because€of€theÐ ð@ Ðirresponsibility€of€your€company€and€your€insurance€company€thatÐ à0 Ðhires€someone€like€you,€a€lawyer,€to€come€in€here€to€try€to€beat€thisÐ Ð  Ðpoor€ignorant€man€out€of€his€money.€€Thatððs€exactly€why€weððre€here,Ð À! Ðand€this€document€is€an€example€of€it.а" ` x` x ÐÌà  àAlthough€absolute€certainty€is€not€required€to€prove€causation,€the€medical€testimonyÐ $à" Ðconnecting€the€injury€with€the€work€related€activity€must€not€be€so€uncertain€or€speculative€thatÐ €%Ð # Ðassigning€liability€to€the€employer€would€be€arbitrary€or€only€a€mere€possibility.€€òòLivingston€v.Ð p&À!$ ÐShelby€Williams€Indus.,€Inc.óó,€811€S.W.2d€511,€515€(Tenn.€1991)€quoting€òòTindall€v.€Waring€ParkÐ `'°"% ÐAssððn.óó,€725€S.W.2d€935,€937€(Tenn.€1987).€€Reasonable€doubt€of€causation€is€to€be€construed€in€theÐ P( #& Ðemployeeððs€favor.€€òòHillóó,€942€S.W.2d€at€487.Ð @)$' ÐÌà  àUpon€our€de€novo€review,€we€find€that€the€deposition€of€Dr.€Feild€was€not€objective€andÐ  +p&) Ðunbiased€and€does€not€preponderate€against€the€chancellorððs€finding€that€it€was€unreliable€and€Ô_ÔshouldÐ ,`'* Ðbe€discounted.€€We€may€make€our€own€independent€assessment€of€the€medical€evidence€when€it€isÐ ° Ðpresented€by€deposition€or€written€reports,€as€it€is€in€this€case.€€òòCooper€v.€Insurance€Co.€of€N.€Am.óó,Ð  ð Ð884€S.W.2d€446,€451€(Tenn.€1994);€òòLanders€v.€Firemanððs€Fund€Ins.€Co.óó,€775€S.W.2d€355,€356Ð à Ð(Tenn.€1989).€€In€doing€so,€we€should€not€ignore€the€conclusion€reached€by€the€trial€judge€upon€theÐ €Ð Ðassessment€of€the€conflicting€medical€opinions.€€We€find€that€there€is€reason€in€the€record€toÐ pÀ Ðdemonstrate€the€unreliability€of€the€testimony€and€written€reports€of€the€examining€physician.Ð ` ° ÐÌÔ  Ôà@ìì!ìàò òREMAINING€ARGUMENTSó óˆÐ @  ÐÌà  àThe€employee€has€the€burden€of€proving€every€element€of€the€case,€including€causation€andÐ  p  Ðpermanency€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence.€€òòÔ_ÔTindallÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔWaringÔ_Ô€Park€Assn.óó,€725€S.W.2d€935,Ð `  Ð937€(Tenn.€1987).€€To€be€compensable€under€workersðð€compensation€law,€an€injury€must€both€ð ðariseÐ P  Ðout€ofðð€as€well€as€be€ð ðin€the€course€ofðð€employment.€€Although€absolute€certainty€is€not€required€toÐ ð@  Ðprove€causation,€the€medical€testimony€connecting€the€injury€with€the€work€related€activity€must€notÐ à0  Ðbe€so€uncertain€or€speculative€that€assigning€liability€to€the€employer€would€be€arbitrary€or€only€aÐ Ð  Ðmere€possibility.€€òòÔ_ÔLivingstonÔ_Ô€v.€Shelby€Williams€Indus.,€Inc.óó,€811€S.W.2d€511,€515€(Tenn.€1991).€Ð À ÐReasonable€doubt€of€causation€is€to€be€construed€in€the€employeeððs€favor.€€The€record€is€replete€withÐ ° Ðinconsistencies€as€to€when€the€accident€occurred.Ð  ð ÐÌà  àUpon€our€de€novo€review,€we€find€that€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trialÐ €Ð Ðcourtððs€finding€that€the€plaintiff€did€not€show€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence€that€plaintiffÐ pÀ Ðsuffered€an€injury€by€accident€arising€out€of€and€in€the€scope€of€employerððs€employment€and€suchÐ `° Ðaccidental€injury€has€caused€substantial€permanent€physical€impairment€and€vocational€disability.Ð P  ÐÌÔ  Ôà@FF%ìàò òCONCLUSIONó óˆÐ 0€ ÐÌà  àFor€the€foregoing€reasons,€we€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€judgment.Ð ` ÐÌà  àCosts€are€assessed€against€the€plaintiff.Ð ð@ ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð °"  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àGEORGE€R.€ELLIS,€Special€JudgeÐ  #ð! ÐÌÌÐ  p&À!$ ÐÔ‡¼¾¤»XX¼ãÔà@7 7 ìàIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@''%ìàAT€JACKSONˆÐ È ÐÔ#†X¼ãX»¼¾¤-<#ÔÌò òÔ‡¼¾¤»XX¼ãÔÓ  ÓJAMES€E.€Ô_ÔBECTONÔ_Ô€€v.€€Ô_ÔGRISHAMÔ_Ô€CORPORATIONÔ#†X¼ãX»¼¾¤î<#Ôó óÐ Ð  ÐÓ =ÓÌà@  ìàò òChancery€Court€for€Shelby€CountyˆÐ Ø ( Ðà@ÁÁ$ìàNo.€107007„2ˆÐ È  ÐÌÌà@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<— ` A߈Ð ˜ è  ÐÌà@  ìàNo.€W1999„00183„SC„WCM„CV€„€Filed€November€14,€2000ˆÐ —ç  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<v` AßÐ wÇ  Ðó óÌÔ‡¼¾¤»XX¼ãÔÔ#†X¼ãX»¼¾¤n?#Ôà@ƒƒ(ìàò òORDERó óÔ‡¼¾¤»XX¼ãÔÔ#†X¼ãX»¼¾¤Í?#ԈРvÆ  ÐÌòòóóÔ‡¼¾¤»XX¼ãÔÔ#†X¼ãX»¼¾¤,@#ÔÌÔ‡¼¾¤»XX¼ãÔÔ#†X¼ãX»¼¾¤o@#Ôà  àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€motion€for€review€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð50„6„Ð F– Ð225(e)(5)(B),€the€entire€record,€including€the€order€of€referral€to€the€Special€Workers'€CompensationÐ 6† ÐAppeals€Panel,€and€the€Panel's€Memorandum€Opinion€setting€forth€its€findings€of€fact€andÐ &v Ðconclusions€of€law,€which€are€incorporated€herein€by€reference;Ð f ÐÌà  àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€motion€for€review€is€not€well€taken€and€shouldÐ öF Ðbe€denied;€and€Ð æ6 ÐÌà  àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Panel's€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law€are€adoptedÐ Æ Ðand€affirmed,€and€the€decision€of€the€Panel€is€made€the€judgment€of€the€Court.Ð ¶ ÐÌà  àCosts€will€be€paid€by€James€E.€Ô_ÔBectonÔ_Ô,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ð –æ ÐÌà  àIT€IS€SO€ORDERED.Ð v Æ ÐÔ‡¼¾¤»XX¼ãÔÔ#†X¼ãX»¼¾¤²D#ÔÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àPER€Ô_ÔCURIAMÔ_ÔÐ &%v $ ÐÌÌ