ÿWPC™  5^v\B\¶A°tªö¼A²t¹™…v»ðk–a.u0’—{fò~Ïh´ˆŸ»­UwЧìë]ëû°Aû!’ ï¬8hÂò€!ÔG8¶„áŒø|‹XïÖǧê÷‰Ì´q0«´ïsêDJ8I8´à!À¼OR{,Ç ÍXêó6§l±õxôˆHT׬¹¬ØutEÀH U| Å5‘5Y@£ZLÉúdSª±çcÐVº¯; Ç>Óc‰nJp+¾:¦ËÞbÌŒQcÕ.§èŽü†._ÒŽx‹[Ü-AFœNNîE_ ØõU—öI@œ¨’‰‡· ùÕˆw¿Œ;Áã½O“˜öp4ó]iYøŸÉ…û˜ÞÙ5SmˆÖëÂS9éiïõ~íE䊔úgd)û¶¾5ͼ¬:z[Àów¹Ó‚0ßÏì©q-yPuŒáU°×6”/\_Åêw›Ò©Ýÿ ^ꉼW»¸«aÉè0Ü„s¨ï0| hU¦=ÿÞÛ2k=zcÂÜi÷ôTÓIzº’¼0гÏg–¦R„ój  Õ®‘îNÏÇ!©ùV™õ‘tG7Ä£åÉ_?0Æ&ƒNy’­ÿ;=cÍ:¢àº0Y¬×ÅÂ67©¼åÞ=ºrku{á²U#ɦU No %½ 0:à U,ý U>) ^ g ws 4w ‹ š mœ N³ 9µ 0~î 0Dl N° U@² UNò U:@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Ez z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z z B| ˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL6ÒV,,,,ÒV0(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX(üœ$¡¡ÔUSUS.,Ô,c½¬AZ‹Arial ô\  `‹&Times New Roman|š;1Ï weÒ0xê:i¢Ø+003|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ /Ý ƒÄ($ÝÔUSUS.,Ôà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€The€first€names€of€the€parties€are€used€throughout€this€opinion,€not€out€of€disrespect€forÐ ° Ðthe€parties,€but€to€better€identify€the€parties€since€they€all€have€the€same€family€name.(.(3Ä($¤¤Ý ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(%Ã$òòÚ  Ú1Ú  Úóó(ÖÃ9 Z‹(Times New Roman (í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular,ZýµAZ‹"Arial Regular dÝ ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡X:XXXÔÔ‡¼ÀH»XX:ÔÓ  ÓIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÐ ° ÐSPECIAL€WORKERSðð€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELÐ »  ÐAT€NASHVILLEÐ Æ ÐÌJEFFREY€K.€BOYCE€V.€DAB€PLUMBING,€INC.€and€OAK€RIVERÐ Ü, ÐINSURANCE€COMPANYÐ ç 7 ÐÌDirect€Appeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€of€Bedford€CountyÐ ý M ÐNo.€24,423,€Hon.€Ô_ÔJ.B.Ô_Ô€Cox,€JudgeÐ  X Ð___________________________Ð c  ÐÌNo.€€M2003„01903„Ô_ÔWCÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Mailed€„€July€28,€2004Ð )y  ÐFiled€„€September€27,€2004Ð 4„  Ð___________________________Ð ?  ÐÓ{ÓÌThis€workersðð€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€SpecialÐ U¥ ÐWorkersðð€Compensation€Appeals€Panel€in€accordance€with€Tenn.€CodeÐ `° ÐAnn.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(3)€for€hearing€and€reporting€of€findings€of€fact€andÐ k» Ðconclusions€of€law.€€The€employer€contends€that€the€trial€court€erroneously:Ð vÆ Ð(1)€awarded€payment€of€unauthorized€medical€expenses,€(2)€refused€toÐ Ñ Ðapply€the€statutory€cap€allowed€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„241(a)(1)€to€theÐ ŒÜ Ðpermanent€partial€disability€award,€and€(3)€granted€excessive€permanentÐ —ç Ðpartial€disability€benefits€in€light€of€the€employeeððs€vocational€factors.€€TheÐ ¢ò Ðissues€turn€on€witness€credibility€and€findings€of€fact.€€The€Panel€defers€toÐ ­ý Ðthe€trial€court€and€finds€that€the€trial€court€opinion€should€be€affirmed€in€allÐ ¸ Ðrespects.€€Ð à ÐÌò òTenn.€Code€Ann.€ððó ó€ò ò50„6„225(e)(3)€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€theÐ Ù ) ÐCircuit€Court€Affirmed.€€Ð ë!; ÐÌó óJohn€A.€Ô_ÔTurnbullÔ_Ô,€Sp.€J.,€Delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€FrankÐ $_ ÐF.€Ô_ÔDrowotaÔ_Ô,€III,€Chief€Justice,€and€James€L.€Ô_ÔWeatherfordÔ_Ô,€Sr,€Sp.€J.,€joined.€Ð %j  ÐÌÔ_ÔClancyÔ_Ô€F.€Covert€and€Michael€W.€Jones,€Ô_ÔWimberlyÔ_Ô€Lawson€Ô_ÔSealeÔ_Ô€Wright€&Ð 0'€"! ÐÔ_ÔDavesÔ_Ô,€Nashville,€TN,€for€the€appellants,€DAB€Plumbing,€Inc.€and€OakÐ ;(‹#" ÐRiver€Insurance€Co.Ð F)–$# ÐÌJoseph€L.€Mercer,€Nashville,€TN,€for€the€appellee,€Jeffrey€K.€Boyce.Ð \+¬&% ÐÌÐ r-Â(' ЇÓ  ÓMEMORANDUM€OPINIONÐ ° ÐÌFactsÐ Æ ÐÌÓ  Óà  àJeffrey€Boyce€(ð ðJeffreyðð)׃×Ý ƒ%ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×,€the€appellee,€was€employed€by€DABÐ Ü, ÐPlumbing,€Inc.€(ð ðDABðð),€which€is€owned€by€his€brother€David€BoyceÐ ç 7 Ð(ð ðDavidðð)€and€his€sister„in„law€Debbie€Boyce€(ð ðDebbieðð).€€Jeffrey€was€aÐ ò B Ðð ðplumbersðð€helperðð€who€carried€materials€to€and€from€a€job€site€andÐ ý M Ðperformed€the€physical€ð ðgrunt€workðð€necessary€to€enable€the€plumber€to€doÐ  X Ðhis€job.€€On€May€31,€2002,€Jeffrey€injured€his€back€when€he€stooped€toÐ c  Ðwalk€under€a€chain€as€he€returned€from€the€truck€carrying€materials.€Ð n  ÐDebbie€took€Jeffrey€to€the€emergency€room€that€day.€€He€was€told€to€returnÐ )y  Ðto€see€another€doctor€if€he€was€still€in€pain€in€a€few€days.€€Jeffrey€neverÐ 4„  Ðsaw€the€recommended€doctor€but€instead€returned€to€work.€Ð ?  ÐÌà  àAfter€Jeffrey€had€returned€to€work€for€over€three€months,€he€andÐ U¥ ÐDavid€had€an€argument€over€a€personal€matter€on€September€9,€2002.€Ð `° ÐJeffrey€claims€that€David€terminated€his€employment€at€that€time€in€a€fit€ofÐ k» Ðanger.€€David€claims€that€he€never€terminated€Jeffreyððs€employment,€butÐ vÆ Ðassumed€Jeffrey€had€quit€because€he€did€not€return€to€work.€€However,€onÐ Ñ Ðappeal€David€claims€that€he€did€terminate€Jeffrey€for€misconduct€(notÐ ŒÜ Ðreporting€to€work€on€September€9).€€At€some€time€following€the€day€of€theÐ —ç Ðargument,€David€retrieved€Jeffreyððs€company€truck,€which€was€JeffreyððsÐ ¢ò Ðonly€vehicle.€Ð ­ý ÐÌà  àJeffrey€claims€that€he€repeatedly€told€David€and€Debbie€of€hisÐ Ã Ðcontinued€€back€pain,€although€David€and€Debbie€deny€being€aware€thatÐ Î ÐJeffrey€needed€to€see€a€doctor.€€Neither€party€asserts€that€Jeffrey€directlyÐ Ù ) Ðrequested€to€see€a€doctor.€€Jeffrey€claims€he€was€afraid€to€see€or€requestÐ ä!4 Ðto€see€a€doctor€because€requesting€medical€attention€would€jeopardize€hisÐ ï"? Ðemployment.€€Ð ú#J Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌà  àThere€is€no€evidence€that€Jeffrey€had€any€prior€medical€problems€withÐ &`!  Ðhis€back.€€Debbie€testified€that€a€workersðð€compensation€report€was€filedÐ 'k"! Ðwith€the€insurance€company€following€Jeffreyððs€injury.€€Jeffrey€was€neverÐ &(v#" Ðcontacted€by€a€representative€from€DABððs€insurance€company,€and€DABÐ 1)$# Ðdid€not€comply€with€the€Tennessee€statute€requiring€it€to€furnish€Jeffrey€withÐ <*Œ%$ Ða€panel€of€doctors€to€consult.€€Ð ° ÐÌà  àJeffrey€was€referred€to€Dr.€Walter€W.€Wheelhouse€by€his€attorney.€Ð Æ ÐDr.€Wheelhouse,€the€treating€physician,€testified€in€his€deposition€thatÐ Ñ! ÐJeffrey€had€reached€maximum€medical€improvement€(ð ðMMIðð)€as€of€April€30,Ð Ü, Ð2003.€€Dr.€Wheelhouse€assigned€Jeffrey€a€13%€anatomic€impairment€to€hisÐ ç 7 Ðbody€as€a€whole€with€permanent€restrictions€to€avoid€bending,€stooping,Ð ò B Ðlifting,€twisting,€or€turning.€€Dr.€Wheelhouse€stated€that€Jeffrey€could€notÐ ý M Ðreturn€to€the€same€type€of€work€he€had€done€previously€because€of€theseÐ  X Ðrestrictions.€€Dr.€William€H.€Ô_ÔLedbetterÔ_Ô€performed€an€independent€medicalÐ c  Ðevaluation€of€Jeffrey€at€the€request€of€DAB.€€He€determined€that€JeffreyÐ n  Ðwas€not€at€MMI,€but€that€he€would€have€at€least€a€5%€permanent€physicalÐ )y  Ðimpairment€rating€under€the€AMA€Guide€to€Evaluation€of€PermanentÐ 4„  ÐImpairment,€Fifth€Edition.€€Dr.€Ô_ÔLedbetterÔ_Ô,€like€Dr.€Wheelhouse,€diagnosed€aÐ ?  Ðruptured€disc€at€L4„L5€with€nerve€root€compression,€and€recommended€theÐ Jš Ðavoidance€of€bending,€stooping,€lifting,€twisting,€and€turning.€€€Dr.€Ô_ÔLedbetterÔ_ÔÐ U¥ Ðrecommended€further€treatment€of€Ô_ÔepiduralÔ_Ô€steroid€injections,€and€if€notÐ `° Ðsuccessful,€surgery.€€Ð k» ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€found€that€Jeffrey€was€justified€in€seeking€medical€careÐ Ñ Ðfrom€Dr.€Wheelhouse,€that€there€had€been€no€meaningful€return€to€work,Ð ŒÜ Ðand€that€Jeffrey€had€suffered€a€50%€disability€to€the€body€as€a€whole.Ð —ç ÐÌÓ  ÓAnalysisÐ ­ý ÐÌÓ  Óà  àOn€appeal,€we€are€to€review€the€record€anew,€with€the€presumptionÐ Ã Ðthat€the€factual€findings€of€the€trial€court€are€correct€unless€theÐ Î Ðpreponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.€€Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€ðð€50„6„Ð Ù ) Ð225(e)(2)€(2002).€€Where€the€trial€judge€made€a€determination€based€onÐ ä!4 Ðlive€witness€testimony,€especially€where€issues€of€credibility€and€weight€ofÐ ï"? Ðoral€testimony€are€involved,€great€deference€must€be€given€to€that€findingÐ ú#J Ðon€review.€€òòHumphrey€v.€David€Ô_ÔWitherspoonÔ_Ô,€Inc.óó,€734€S.W.2d€315€(Tenn.Ð %U  Ð1987).€€Ð &`!  ÐÌÓ  ÓUnauthorized€Treatment€ExpensesÐ &(v#" ÐÌÓ  Óà  àDAB€contends€that€it€should€not€be€required€to€pay€for€treatmentÐ <*Œ%$ Ðprovided€by€Dr.€Wheelhouse€because€it€was€unaware€that€Jeffrey€saw€Dr.Ð G+—&% ÐWheelhouse€and€did€not€approve€the€expenses.€€Whether€an€employee€isÐ R,¢'& Ðjustified€in€seeking€medical€services€to€be€paid€for€by€the€employer€withoutÐ ]-­(' Ðconsulting€the€employer€depends€on€the€circumstances€of€each€case.€Ð ° ÐòòHarris€v.€Kroger€Co.óó,€567€S.W.2d€161,€163€(Tenn.€1978).€€Failure€by€theÐ »  Ðemployer€to€furnish€an€injured€employee€with€a€list€of€physicians,€requiredÐ Æ Ðby€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„204€(a)(4)(A),€does€not€automatically€renderÐ Ñ! Ðthe€employer€liable€for€medical€expenses.€€òòSee€Ô_ÔDorrisÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔINAÔ_Ô€Ins.€Co.óó,€764Ð Ü, ÐS.W.2d€538,€541€(Tenn.€1989).€€The€record€in€this€case€does€not€clearlyÐ ç 7 Ðdemonstrate€whether€Jeffrey€was€explicitly€denied€medical€care€by€DAB,Ð ò B Ðand€it€does€not€demonstrate€that€expenses€incurred€for€treatment€by€Dr.Ð ý M ÐWheelhouse€were€unnecessary€and€unreasonable.€€The€trial€judgeÐ  X Ðbelieved€the€expenses€were€reasonable€and€necessary,€and€the€evidenceÐ c  Ðdoes€not€preponderate€against€that€finding.€€Ð n  ÐÌÓ  ÓApplication€of€Statutory€CapÐ 4„  ÐÓ  ÓÌà  àDAB€next€contends€that€because€Jeffrey€was€fired€for€misconduct,Ð Jš Ðthe€statutory€cap€should€apply€to€limit€Jeffreyððs€award.€€The€cap€establishedÐ U¥ Ðin€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„241(a)(1)€limits€the€award€in€cases€where€anÐ `° Ðinjured€employee€is€returned€to€work€at€a€wage€equal€to€or€greater€than€theÐ k» Ðwage€the€employee€was€receiving€at€the€time€of€the€injury.€€If€theÐ vÆ Ðemployerððs€offer€is€not€reasonable€in€light€of€the€circumstances€of€theÐ Ñ Ðemployeeððs€physical€condition,€then€the€offer€of€employment€is€notÐ ŒÜ Ðmeaningful€and€the€injured€employee€may€receive€disability€benefits€up€toÐ —ç Ðsix€times€the€amount€of€the€medical€impairment.€€òòNewton€v.€Scott€HealthÐ ¢ò ÐCare€Ctr.óó,€914€S.W.2d€884,€886€(Tenn.€1995).€€However,€an€employeeððsÐ ­ý Ðbenefits€will€be€limited€to€two€and€one„half€times€the€medical€impairment€ifÐ ¸ Ðhis€refusal€to€return€to€the€offered€position€is€unreasonable.€€òòId.óó€€TheÐ Ã Ðdetermination€of€what€is€reasonable€depends€on€the€facts€of€each€case.€€òòId.óóÐ Î Ðòòóó€When€an€employee€is€fired€for€misconduct€prior€to€treatment€of€the€injury,Ð Ù ) Ðthe€cap€may€apply€even€though€the€employer€does€not€offer€re„employmentÐ ä!4 Ðafter€treatment.€€òòCarter€v.€First€Source€Furniture€Groupóó,€92€S.W.3d€367,Ð ï"? Ð371€(Tenn.€2002).€Ð ú#J ÐÌà  àThe€record€contains€conflicting€testimony€regarding€the€availability€ofÐ &`!  Ðan€appropriate€position€at€DAB€that€is€within€Jeffreyððs€prescribed€physicalÐ 'k"! Ðrestrictions.€€The€record€also€contains€conflicting€testimony€regarding€theÐ &(v#" Ðreason€for€Jeffreyððs€separation€from€the€company.€€Ð 1)$# ÐÌà  àIt€was€Jeffreyððs€position€that€he€was€involuntarily€terminated€followingÐ G+—&% Ða€personal€dispute€with€David.€€The€trial€judge€accredited€JeffreyððsÐ R,¢'& Ðtestimony.€€We€have€carefully€read€the€record€and€the€evidence€does€notÐ ]-­(' ÐÔ_Ôpreponderate€against€that€finding.€€Ð ° ÐÌÓ  ÓVocational€DisabilityÐ Æ ÐÌÓ  Óà  àFinally,€DAB€asserts€that€Jeffreyððs€permanent€partial€disability€awardÐ Ü, Ðis€excessive€in€light€of€his€vocational€factors.€€Vocational€impairment€is€notÐ ç 7 Ðmeasured€by€whether€the€employee€can€return€to€his€original€job€butÐ ò B Ðwhether€his€ability€to€earn€a€living€has€decreased.€€òòGeorge€v.€Bldg.Ð ý M ÐMaterials€Corp.€of€Americaóó,€44€S.W.3d€481,€488€(Tenn.€2001).€€The€extentÐ  X Ðof€vocational€disability€is€a€question€of€fact.€€òòStory€v.€Legion€Ins.€Co.óó,€3Ð c  ÐS.W.3d€450,€456€(Tenn.€1999).€€Many€factors,€including€ð ðjob€skills,Ð n  Ðeducation,€training,€duration€of€disability...€in€addition€to€the€anatomicalÐ )y  Ðdisability€testified€to€by€medical€expertsðð€must€be€considered€in€making€thisÐ 4„  Ðdetermination.€€òòClark€v.€Ô_ÔNatððlÔ_Ô€Union€Fire€Ins.€Co.óó,€744€S.W.2d€586,€588Ð ?  Ð(Tenn.€1989).òòóó€€Another€relevant€factor€is€re„employment€of€the€injuredÐ Jš Ðworker€after€the€injury,€whether€in€the€same€job€or€in€a€different€one.€€òòId.óó€atÐ U¥ Ð589òòóó.€€However,€despite€the€employeeððs€return€to€any€employment,€he€isÐ `° Ðentitled€to€compensation€if€his€ability€to€earn€wages€in€any€form€ofÐ k» Ðemployment€that€would€have€been€available€to€him€in€an€uninjuredÐ vÆ Ðcondition€is€diminished€by€an€injury.€€òòId.óó€The€plaintiffððs€testimony€also€mayÐ Ñ Ðbe€considered€in€establishing€the€existence€and€extent€of€pain€and€inabilityÐ ŒÜ Ðto€work.€€òòId.óó€€€€Ð —ç ÐÌà  àJeffrey€was€thirty„one€at€the€time€of€trial€and€has€a€high€schoolÐ ­ý Ðeducation.€€He€testified€at€trial€that€he€cannot€do€everyday€tasks€such€asÐ ¸ Ðputting€on€his€shoes€without€pain.€€His€previous€jobs€mostly€have€involvedÐ Ã Ðphysical€labor€and€have€included€positions€as€a€press€operator€and€aÐ Î Ðshipping€clerk.€€Dr.€Wheelhouse€assigned€Jeffrey€a€permanent€physicalÐ Ù ) Ðimpairment€of€13%€and,€like€Dr.€Ô_ÔLedbetterÔ_Ô,€imposed€significant€restrictionsÐ ä!4 Ðon€Jeffreyððs€movement.€òòóó€At€the€time€of€the€trial,€Dr.€Wheelhouse,€theÐ ï"? Ðtreating€physician,€recommended€that€Jeffrey€should€remain€off€work,€andÐ ú#J Ðthat€he€should€not€continue€as€a€plumbersðð€helper.€€Ð %U  ÐÌà  àòòóóThe€trial€court€determined€that€Jeffrey€sustained€permanent€partialÐ 'k"! Ðdisability€of€50%€to€the€body€as€a€whole€on€the€basis€of€his€injury€and€hisÐ &(v#" Ðlimited€vocational€and€transferable€skills.€€We€find€on€the€record€before€usÐ 1)$# Ðthat€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€courtððs€finding.€Ð <*Œ%$ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àÌÓ  ÓÌFrivolous€AppealÐ ]-­(' ÐÓ  ÓÌà  àJeffrey€argues€that€he€should€receive€liquidated€damages€underÐ »  ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225(h)€because€the€appeal€is€frivolous.€€If€itÐ Æ Ðappears€that€a€workersðð€compensation€appeal€is€frivolous€or€taken€solely€forÐ Ñ! Ðdelay,€the€court€may€award€damages€in€favor€of€the€appellee.€€òòóóTenn.€CodeÐ Ü, ÐAnn.€ðð€50„6„225(h);€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„1„122.Ô#†¼! »»¼ÀH=#ÔÔ‡¼! »»¼! ÔÔ#†XlX»¼! \#Ô€€Ô#†XlXXXl:>#ÔÔ‡X:XXXlÔÔ‡¼ÀH»XX:ÔThe€court€must€useÐ ç 7 Ðdiscretion€in€granting€such€damages€ð ðso€as€not€to€discourage€legitimateÐ ò B Ðappeals.ðð€€òòDavis€v.€Gulf€Ins.€Groupóó,€546€S.W.2d€583,€586€(Tenn.€1977)Ð ý M Ð(discussing€the€predecessor€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€27„1„122).€€An€appeal€isÐ  X Ðconsidered€frivolous€if€it€lacks€merit€or€has€no€reasonable€chance€ofÐ c  Ðsuccess.€€òòÔ_ÔBursackÔ_Ô€v.€Wilsonóó,€982€S.W.2d€341,€345€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1998)Ô#†X:X»¼ÀHÀ>#ÔÔ#†XlXXX:¡>#ÔÔ‡XlXXXlÔ.€Ð n  ÐÔ‡¼! »XXlÔÔ#†¼! »»¼! 5A#ÔÔ‡¼ÀH»»¼! ÔWe€find€that€the€evidence€on€appeal€is€conflicting.€€Determination€of€theÐ )y  Ðissues€thus€turned€on€credibility.€€Since€there€was€significant€conflict€in€theÐ 4„  Ðfacts€and€the€legal€conclusions€to€be€drawn€from€the€facts,€the€appeal€wasÐ ?  Ðnot€frivolous.€Ð Jš ÐÌÌÓ  ÓConclusionÐ k» ÐÌÓ  Óà  àWe€hold€that€the€trial€courtððs€judgment€should€be€affirmed€in€allÐ Ñ Ðrespects.€€The€costs€on€appeal€are€assessed€against€the€appellants,€DABÐ ŒÜ ÐPlumbing,€Inc.€and€Oak€River€Insurance€Company.Ð —ç ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àà p àÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à________________________________Ð Ã Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àJOHN€A.€Ô_ÔTURNBULLÔ_Ô,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÐ Î ÐÔ#†¼! »»¼ÀH­A#ÔÔ#†XlX»¼! kA#ÔÐ  Ù ) ÐÔ‡XlXXXlÔ€€Ô#†XlXXXl{F#ÔÔ‡XAÂXXXlÔÔ‡¼$»XXAÂÔà@9 9 ìàIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@§§$ìàAT€NASHVILLEˆÐ À ÐÔ#†XAÂX»¼$ÞF#ÔÌò òÔ‡¼$»XXAÂÔÓ  ÓJEFFREY€K.€BOYCE€òòóóv.€DAB€PLUMBING,€INC.,€òòÔ#†XAÂX.¼$¡G#ÔEt€Al.ó óóóÐ ¹  ÐÓÀGÓÌà@Î Î ìàò òChancery€Court€for€Bedford€CountyˆÐ ³  Ðà@--%ìàNo.€24,423ˆÐ  í ÐÌÌà@ìì*ìàßA€T() °°` d€÷E<Z ` A߈Ð [ «  ÐÌà@» » ìàNo.€M2003„01903„SC„WCM„CV€„€Filed€„€September€27,€2004ˆÐ T¤  ÐÌßA€T() °°` dE<'` AßÐ (x  Ðó óÌÌà@//#ìàò òJUDGMENT€ORDERó óˆÐ  Y  ÐÓ  ÓÌÔ#†XlXXXA¿F#Ôà  àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€the€motion€for€review€filed€by€DAB€Plumbing,€Inc.,€and€Ð Ü, ÐOak€River€Insurance€Company,€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð50-6-225(e)(5)(B),€the€entire€record,Ð Å Ðincluding€the€order€of€referral€to€the€Special€Workersðð€Compensation€Appeals€Panel,€and€the€PanelððsÐ ®þ ÐMemorandum€Opinion€setting€forth€its€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.€Ð —ç ÐÌà  àIt€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€motion€for€review€is€not€well„taken€and€is€therefore€denied.€Ð i¹ ÐThe€Panelððs€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law,€which€are€incorporated€by€reference,€areÐ R¢ Ðadopted€and€affirmed.€€The€decision€of€the€Panel€is€made€the€judgment€of€the€Court.Ð ;‹ ÐÌà  àCosts€are€assessed€to€DAB€Plumbing,€Inc.,€and€Oak€River€Insurance€Company,€and€theirÐ  ] Ðsurety,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ð öF ÐÔ‡XlXXXlÔÌà  àIt€is€so€ORDERED.Ð È ÐÌÓ2JÓÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àPER€Ô_ÔCURIAMÔ_ÔÐ ƒ!Ó! ÐÌÔ_ÔDrowotaÔ_Ô,€C.J.,€not€participatingà@ìì*ìàÔ#†XlXXXlQN#ÔÔ‡XlXXXlԈРU#¥# ÐÔ#†XlXXXl¾O#ÔÔ‡X:XXXlÔ€Ô#†XlXXX:P#ÔÔ‡X:XXXlÔ€Ô#†XlXXX:YP#Ô