WPCB 7# UN %k 0qU:l4 0D w@ 0?U 0D  0J 0T" 0^v 0h 0r< 0| 0* 0 1u@ 0d AQj 00 0@G B D/ B D3U>#U*aU*B)DC AM!n5v~voHP LaserJet 4 PlusHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLH(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX(H=$  HTR[A' Legal[A' LegalA' LegalA' LegalTX_XXX7XXdXXd7,  AZ"Arial Regularc$ 3|x($$   1   DӀV DӀ((3xX$ H=!  HTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'TXXXX7eAXXdd7   `   0  (#$  0  2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X!"#&C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ H=!  HTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'TXXXX7eAXXdd7  ("$     d((' dxdP Pd$$$$'dxd<  9p`(&Times New Roman<  9p`(Arial<  9p`(Times% Line 7 d00007Border 1dd!#1C << G  !  #d#-    H \RA'\.#d#  ""  .   YYY FILED.XMay8,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk    !#d#-    H \RA'\.#d#  ""  .   YYY FILED.XMay8,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk  PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   ion-F Geneva  ion-F Geneva ! . -    H \RA'\.#//Xd##//Xd#  !    --R231A1-j|` . `@Rߛ @ INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE@ SPECIALWORKERS'COMPENSATIONAPPEALSPANEL@ ATNASHVILLE   JAMESERNESTBIGGS,  ) DAVIDSONCHANCERY      )  Plaintiff/Appellant  ) NO.01S019711CH00239      )       ) HON.IRVINH.KILCREASE,JONESSTONECOMPANY,INC., ) CHANCELLOR      ) Defendant/Appellee  ) FortheAppellant:   FortheAppellee: LuvellL.Glanton    BlakeleyD.Matthews915JeffersonStreet   LeighA.BuckleyNashville,TN37208   CORNELIUS&COLLINS      2700NashvilleCityCenter      511UnionStreet      P.O.Box190695      Nashville,TN37219  MEMORANDUMOPINIONMembersofPanel: JusticeJaniceM.HolderSeniorJudgeWilliamH.InmanSpecialJudgeWilliamS.Russell  AFFIRMED      INMAN,SeniorJudge Thisworkers'compensationappealhasbeenreferredtotheSpecialWorkers'CompensationAppealsPaneloftheSupremeCourtinaccordancewithTenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(3)forhearingandreportingtotheSupremeCourtoffindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw. Theemployeewasawardedbenefitsfora30percentpermanentpartialdisabilitytohiswholebody.Heappeals,claimingthathisanatomicalimpairmentistenpercent,whichshouldbeextrapolatedtototalandpermanentdisability.Thethrustofhisargumentisdirectedtotheweighttobegiventotheexperttestimony. TheemployeradmittedthattheemployeesufferedacompensablebackinjuryonSeptember8,1995.Theissuesattrialwerelimitedtotheextentofphysicalimpairmentandresidualvocationaldisability.TheChancellorfoundtheplaintiffhadafivepercentimpairment.Heappliedamultiplierofsix,ϜT.C.A.506241,resultinginafindingof30percentpermanentpartialdisabilitytohiswholebody. ThetreatingphysicianwasDr.StanleyG.Hopp,anorthopedicspecialist,whotestifiedthattheplaintiffsradicularpainwasemanatingfromtherightL5nerveroot.HeperformedsurgeryonFebruary23,1996andremovedtheoffendingspurs.Recoverywashamperedbecauseofdiabetes,butwiththepassageoftimetheplaintiffwasabletowork,withliftingrestrictions. Dr.DavidGaw,orthopedicspecialist,examinedtheplaintiffforpurposesofevaluation.HetestifiedthatinhisviewtheplaintiffhadatenpercentimpairmentbasedonDRECategoryIIIoftheGuidelines,whichheinterpretedasrequiringthisratingbecause anybodythathasaradiculopathythatsprovenbytestsandhassurgery,thatthrowsthemintoCategoryIII.Heconcededthathefoundnosymptomsofnervedamage,thattheplaintiffwasinnodistressorpain,thathewastakingnomedications,hadnobackspasm,noatrophyorweaknessinhislegsandhadgoodmovement. Reviewofthefindingsoffactmadebythetrialcourtisdenovoupontherecordofthetrialcourt,accompaniedbyapresumptionofthecorrectnessofthefinding,unlessthepreponderanceoftheevidenceisotherwise.Tenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(2).Stonev.CityofMcMinnville,896S.W.2d548,550(Tenn.1995). TheplaintiffarguesthatthetestimonyofDr.GawissuperiortothatofDr.HoppbecausethelattertestifiedhefoundnoobjectiveindicationsofϜradiculopathyalthoughhisofficenotesweretothecontrary.TherecordrevealsthatonepresurgerynoteindicatesL5radiculopathy,butDr.Hoppthenperformedsurgeryandsawtheplaintifffivemoretimeswithnoverifiableindicationsofradiculopathy.Eachphysicianstestimonyisclear,concise,andstraightforward,andwearenotpersuadedthatthetestimonyofanevaluatingphysicianshouldbeaccordedgreaterweightthanthatofthetreatingphysician.Ormanv.WilliamsSonoma,Inc.,803S.W.2d627(Tenn.1991)isinstructive. Theplaintiffcorrectlyarguesthatanassessmentofvocationaldisabilityisbasedontheemployeesabilitytocompeteforjobsinanopenmarketinadisabledconditionbytakingallrelevantfactorintoaccount.See,Corcoranv.FosterAutoGMC,Inc.,746S.W.2d452(Tenn.1988). IfthemaximumdisabilityawardprescribedbyT.C.A.506241(b),withthemultipliers,istobeexceeded,theplaintiffmustprovebyclearandconvincingevidenceatleastthreeofthefollowingfourcriteria:  0 (1)HelacksahighschooldiplomaorGEDorcannotreadorwriteonagradeeightlevel;0 (2)Heisage55orolder;0 (3)Hehasnoreasonablytransferablejobskillsfrompriorvocationalbackgroundandtraining,and0 (4)Hehasnoreasonableemploymentopportunitiesavailablelocallyconsideringhispresentmedicalcondition.   TheChancellorfoundthattheplaintiffprovedonlythathewasunabletoread,andthatthetestimonyofMs.BarbaraStout,aVocationalRehabilitationSpecialistwithGoodwillIndustries,wasmorecrediblethanthetestimonyofDr.JulianNaldosky,alsoaspecialistinthefieldofrehabilitation,becausehe̜testifiedthattheplaintiffwaseither63percent,90percentor100percentdisabled,asheinterpretedthetestimonyofDr.Hopp.Ms.Stouttestifiedthattheplaintiffhadtransferablejobskills,withamplejobopportunitiesintheNashvillemarket. TheevidencedoesnotpreponderateagainstthefindingsoftheChancellorandthejudgmentisaffirmedatthecostsoftheappellant.̀      _________________________________      WilliamH.Inman,SeniorJudgeCONCUR:_____________________________JaniceM.Holder,Justice_____________________________WilliamS.Russell,SpecialJudge    ̜    J24;+'b|$` . `@J@ INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE@ ATNASHVILLEJAMESERNESTBIGGS,  } DAVIDSONCHANCERY      } No.96849IBelow Plaintiff/Appellant  }      } Hon.IrvinKilcrease,Jr.,vs.      } Chancellor      }JONESSTONECOMPANY,INC., } No.01S019711CH00239      } Defendant/Appellee  } AFFIRMED.@ JUDGMENTORDER  ThiscaseisbeforetheCourtupontheentirerecord,includingtheorderofreferraltotheSpecialWorkers'CompensationAppealsPanel,andthePanel'sMemorandumOpinionsettingforthitsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw,whichareincorporatedhereinbyreference.  Whereupon,itappearstotheCourtthattheMemorandumOpinionofthePanelshouldbeacceptedandapproved;and  Itis,therefore,orderedthatthePanel'sfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflawareadoptedandaffirmed,andthedecisionofthePanelismadethejudgmentoftheCourt. ` ` X  CostswillbepaidbyPlaintiff/AppellantandSurety,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary.  ITISSOORDEREDonMay8,1998.       PERCURIAM̛