ÿWPC§! …U*BV %˜U .žrÌ 0> Ë nÛ 0rßQw"Q4s 0J‡ 0TÑ 0^% 0hƒ 0rë 0|] 0†Ù 0_ 1uï 0ddÈ$áB)DC. Bq AMŽ-ÛU6v~> D3¼vÓï 0@ AO ÆQ 0D! D/[! BŠ!ô\  `*Times New RomanTTô"ÝÆÿA€ArialTT'    0 .   (e2n>$©©Ý ƒ fŒ!ÝÔ€X„ XôôÔÔ€X^¾XXX„ ÔÓ  ÓÝ  Ý3|x«ô\  `*Times New RomanTTôôCô\  PŽ6QôP"ÝÆÿA€ArialTTomanTTXXaÝÆÿptQXpô\  `*Times New RomanTT¼¼^ô\  PŽ6Q¼Pô\  `*Times New RomanTT,,)ô\  PŽ6Q,Pô\  `*Times New RomanTTXXPô\  PŽ6QXPô\  `*Times New RomanTT6ô\  PŽ6QP(JfŒ$¡¡Ô€XÔaXôôÔÔ€XÎÊXXXÔaÔÓ  ÓVîPÓ€·‚^!†d2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ Ý ƒ !ÝÔ€ÔÔ€ôÔÔ€XÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ 8 ÒÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ@  ÔÚ  ÚÚ  ÚÔA  ÔÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓ Ý ƒ !ÝÑ  ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ôÔÔ€XÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ 8 ÒÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ@  ÔÚ  ÚÚ  ÚÔA  ÔÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓ% Line 7 d####7Border 1dd d€-$Cþÿ << Gÿÿ #Ý ƒ !ÝÑ  ÑÔ€ÔÔ€ôÔÔ€XÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€XÔÌÌò òNovember€25,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó< Œ 9p`(Courier NewPtPtfHHÚ(ÿáÿáùE1À˜ýHHŽxЀxh'dH%%%%'ÿÿdxdStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  inion Geneva ÒÒ  inion Geneva Ò("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ !ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÔ€ôÔÔ€XÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÑ\R AØ'\ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ 8 ÒÖ€!ÖÑ  ÑÔ&  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÖ€"ÖÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€¼ÔÔ€ÔÞ ÞÌIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌSPECIAL€WORKERS'€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELÌÙ€€ÙÙ€€ÙßR€&'$A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRßÌAT€KNOXVILLEÌ(July€3,€1996€Session)ÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓREBECCA€CALDWELL,€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)€€€€€SULLIVAN€CHANCERYÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€,Ô€Ô€¼Ô€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Plaintiff„Appellee,€€€€€Ô€,Ô€€Ô€ôÔ€Ô€¼Ô€)€€€€€Hon.€John€McClellan,€III,Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€,Ô€€Ô€¼Ô€€€Ô€,Ô€Ô€¼Ô€)€€€€€Chancellor.Ìv.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€XÔ€Ô€,Ô€€Ô€¼Ô€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€ôÔ€Ô€¼Ô€€€Ô€,Ô€Ô€ôÔ€Ô€¼Ô€€)€€€€€No.€03S01„9603„CH„00022ÌKELLY€SERVICES,€INC.€and€€€€€€€€€€Ô€,Ô€Ô€¼Ô€€€)ÌCONTINENTAL€CASUALTY€€€€€€€€€Ô€,Ô€Ô€¼Ô€€€)ÌCOMPANY,€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ô€Ô€Ô€,Ô€€Ô€¼Ô€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Defendant„Appellant.€€€€€€)ÌÌÌÌòòFor€Appellantóó:€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€òòFor€Appellee:ÌóóÌLinda€J.€Hamilton€Mowles€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Myers€N.€MassengillÌLewis,€King,€Krieg€&€Waldrop€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Massengill,€Caldwell,€Hyder€&ÏBunnÌKnoxville,€Tennessee€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Bristol,€TennesseeÌÌÌÌòòÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓM€E€M€O€R€A€N€D€U€M€€€€O€P€I€N€I€O€NóóÌÌÌÌÌòòMembers€of€Panelóó:ÌÌPenny€J.€White,€Associate€Justice,€Supreme€CourtÌRoger€E.€Thayer,€Special€JudgeÌJoe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€Special€JudgeÌÔ'  ÔÌÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓÌÓ  ÓREVERSED€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Loser,ÏJudgeÓ ¹ ÓÌòòÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓMEMORANDUM€OPINIONóóÓ rAÓÌÓ€ÓÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓà àà àThis€workers'€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€theÏSpecial€Workers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€inÏaccordance€with€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€section€50„6„225(e)(3)€for€hearing€andÏreporting€of€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.€€The€employer€contendsÏthe€evidence€preponderates€against€an€award€of€permanent€partial€disabilityÏbenefits.€€The€panel€concludes€the€award€of€permanent€partial€benefitsÏshould€be€reversed.Ìà àà àOn€September€1,€1994,€the€employee€or€claimant,€Caldwell,€anÏemployee€of€Kelly€Services,€was€sent€to€work€at€Moore's€Quality€SnackÏFoods.€€While€working€there,€she€slipped€and€fell,€landing€on€her€hand€andÏarm.€€After€receiving€emergency€care€at€the€emergency€room€of€a€hospital,Ïshe€was€referred€to€Dr.€Michael€Lady,€who€diagnosed€tenosynovitis€and€Ïprescribed€a€splint€and€rest€from€work€until€her€bruising€and€swellingÏsubsided.Ìà àà àOn€October€19,€1994,€the€claimant,€while€visiting€a€relative€inÏLouisiana,€saw€Dr.€Steiner,€and€orthopedic€surgeon.€€Dr.€Steiner€eventuallyÏreleased€her€to€return€to€work€without€any€restrictions€or€permanentÏimpairment.€€She€did.Ìà àà àOn€December€2,€1994,€she€left€work€because€her€injured€armÏwas€hurting.€€The€next€day,€she€revisited€Dr.€Lady,€who€prescribed€a€wristÏsplint,€medication€and€rest.€€The€doctor€continued€to€treat€herÏconservatively.€€His€testimony€by€deposition€included€the€following€relevantÏquestions€and€answers:€Ó 4áÓÌà0 àà0 àà àà àQ.€€Okay.€€Now,€Dr.€Lady,€based€upon€theÏAmerican€Medical€Association€guidelines,€do€you€have€anÏopinion€which€is€also€based€upon€a€reasonable€degree€of€medicalÏcertainty€as€the€percentage€of€permanent€impairment€orÏdisability€that€Ms.€Caldwell€has€sustained€as€a€result€of€theÏinjury€of€September€1,€1994€and€re„injury€of€November€23,Ï1994?Ó ö€ÓÌà0 àà0 àà àà àA.€€My€opinion€as€to€her€disability,€her€conditionÏis,€is€that€she€has€a€recurrent€tenosynovitis€when,€when€exposedÏto€repetitive€work,€as€evidenced€by€her€multiplicity€of€visits.€ÏWhen€her€tenosynovitis€is€present,€I€feel€like€she€hasÏapproximately€15%€disability€based€on€limitation€of€range€ofÏmotion,€limitation€of€strength,€although€not€total€limitation€ofÏuse€of€the€arm....Ìà0 àà0 àà àà à€€€€€The€permanency€is€a€difficult€question€for€meÏto€answer€other€than€when€her€tenosynovitis€is€present,€I€feelÏshe's€unable€to€function€and€when€it's€not,€she€may€appear€toÏhave€a€fairly€normal€exam.€€My€inclination€is€to€think€it'sÏprobable€if€she€continues€repetitive€work,€that€she'll€haveÏperiods€of€disability€as€a€result€of€that.Ìà àà àDr.€Harry€Bachman,€another€orthopedic€surgeon,€testified,€"IÏcannot€find€any€evidence€of€any€permanent€impairment."Ìà àà àThe€chancellor€found€a€permanent€partial€disability€of€sevenÏand€one„half€percent€and€awarded€benefits€accordingly.€€Appellate€review€isÏde€novo€upon€the€record€of€the€trial€court,€accompanied€by€a€presumption€ofÏcorrectness,€unless€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€section€50„6„225(e)(2).€€This€tribunal€is€required€to€conduct€anÏindependent€examination€of€the€record€to€determine€where€theÏpreponderance€of€the€evidence€lies.€€òòGalloway€v.€Memphis€Drum€Serviceóó,Ï822€€S.W.2d€€584€(Tenn.€1991).Ìà àà àUnless€admitted€by€the€employer,€the€claimant€has€the€burden€ofÏproving,€by€competent€evidence,€every€essential€element€of€her€claim.€ÏòòMazanec€v.€Aetna€Ins.€Co.óó,€491€€S.W.2d€€616€(Tenn.€1973).€€If€the€claim€isÏfor€permanent€disability€benefits,€permanency€must€be€proved.€€In€all€butÏthe€most€obvious€cases,€permanency€may€only€be€proved€through€expertÏmedical€testimony.€€òòCorcoran€v.€Foster€Auto€GMC,€Inc.óó,€746€€S.W.2d€€452Ï(Tenn.€1988).€€An€award€may€not€be€based€on€conjecture€or€speculation.€ÏòòCollins€v.€Liberty€Mutual€Ins.€Co.óó,€561€€S.W.2d€€456€(Tenn.€1978).Ìà àà àWe€have€carefully€considered€the€medical€proof€in€the€case€andÏfind€the€evidence€preponderates€against€any€award€of€permanent€disabilityÏbenefits.€€To€the€extent€that€such€benefits€were€awarded,€the€judgment€of€theÏtrial€court€is€reversed.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€plaintiff„appellee.Ó íÓÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ` ‹XÓ_______________________________Ó ÓÌÓ  Ó€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Joe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€JudgeÌÓ  ÓÓ ` ŒXÓCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌPenny€J.€White,€Associate€JusticeÌÌÌÌ_________________________________ÌRoger€E.€Thayer,€JudgeÌÇšÔ€(ÔÔ€(XÔà àà à€IN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€KNOXVILLEÌÌÌREBECCA€CALDWELL,à àà àà à)à àSULLIVAN€CHANCERYÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNO.€€Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellees,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€John€McClellan,€IIIÌV.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àJudgeÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌKELLY€SERVICES,€INC.,€andà à)à àS.€Ct.€No.€03„S„01„9603„CH„00022ÌCONTINENTAL€CASUALTY€COMPANY,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendants/Appellant.à à)à àReversedà àÌÌÓÓÌÌà@ àòòJUDGMENT€ORDERóóÌÌÓ€ÓÌà àà àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€motion€for€reviewÏpursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(5)(B),€the€entireÏrecord,€including€the€order€of€referral€to€the€SpecialÏWorkers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel,€and€the€Panel'sÏMemorandum€Opinion€setting€forth€its€findings€of€fact€andÏconclusions€of€law,€which€are€incorporated€herein€byÏreference;ÌÌà àà àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€motionÏfor€review€is€not€well„taken€and€should€be€dismissed;€andÌÌà àà àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Panel's€findingsÏof€fact€and€conclusions€of€law€are€adopted€and€affirmed,€andÏthe€decision€of€the€Panel€is€made€the€judgment€of€the€Court.ÌÌà àà àCost€will€be€paid€by€Plaintiff/Appellee,€for€whichÏexecution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÌà àà àIt€is€so€ordered€this€_____€day€of€_____________,Ï1996.ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPER€CURIAMÌÔ€ÔÔ€¼Ô