WPCu 3Ik|98tĕ;T}ҿGBsgmy*:ri\:垞YwNYxm2I=JDuF% Z*/"R6;ob>9'u \^N6d['@ڴ.x 4Hދh>.A x8>8Pđ/x*7͡!W斈8E 2= `Ub2_랅F)n>Y%βUEYbg x.V-Leg?ګ1h*Rͭv;kF [ezr>-2&dmń=L1.9P [ 뒱V?=Kg8fiYW4 ,LP 늌g9b %\U@b 0UN*U)Nx^ w zP 4" 6 ;E 0D   P N mE#N 1u 729 0ckN zJUNbjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj 0rrrr B ]] 0z D3 D-Q 0K~~ AS 0 0D A(hH  Z(Times New Roman (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular1X+  C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptK+L+003|x 1 RU$      1  X'X  _Ԁͥ XX'Theclaimanttestifiedaboutherlimitations,butnoneofthedoctorsspecificallyprescribedanyrestrictions.#X'X ͥ#(#$  0  Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5U HP LaserJet 8000 Series PS03#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)(;3$2#  0  .3  0  C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt(hH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular- -(|G2U$ !.8d d 8         0  XxX d(|3$ !.8d d 8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$ !.8d d 8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8d d8     _o8t,XXdd 8  mo@@7 7 INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE  SPECIALWORKERSCOMPENSATIONAPPEALSPANEL & @@ATJACKSON#om# L August20,2001Session "r X'Xo #oXX'#JANIELOUCOBB_v._ԀHENRYI._SIEGEL,_ԀINC.X'Xo   p @@  4  ЀDirectAppealfromtheCircuitCourtforCarrollCounty  p @@No.4036C.Creed_McGinley_,Judge  \ @@*AV) ` dE<` A   No.W200002656_WC_ԄR3CV_MailedSeptember21,2001____;FiledOctober24,_2001__Ԁ   #oXX'#X'XoAV) ` dE<` A        X'XXX'ThisworkerscompensationappealhasbeenreferredtotheSpecialWorkersCompensation  AppealsPanelinaccordancewithTenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(3)forhearingandreportingof  findingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw.#X'XXX'##oXX'}#X'XoInthisappeal,theemployercontendstheevidence v preponderatesagainstthetrialcourt'sawardofpermanentpartialdisabilitybenefitsbasedon42 b percenttothebodyasawhole.#oXX'#X'XoԀAsdiscussedbelow,thepanelhasconcludedthejudgmentshould N beaffirmed. :    Tenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(3)(2000)AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourt b Affirmed.  N     JoeC.Loser,Jr.,Sp.J.#oX'#X'X.o,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichJaniceM.Holder,J.,and & RobertL.Childers,Sp.J.,joined.  JillA.Hanson,Nashville,Tennessee,fortheappellant,_Henry_ԀI._Siegel_ԀCompany.  DonaldE.Parish,Huntingdon,Tennessee,fortheappellee,JanieLouCobb. r!     MEMORANDUMOPINION #oXX'F #X'Xo J#"   #oXX'h #X'Xo  Theemployeeorclaimant,Cobb,is57yearsoldwithahighschooleducation,butalow "%r $ intelligencelevel,andnovocationaltraining.Shehasspentherworkingcareerinproductionwork &^!% andworkedfortheemployer,_Henry_ԀI._Siegel_ԀCompany,for33years.Itisundisputedshesuffered &J"& acompensablelowbackinjuryonMarch22,1999.Becauseofthedisabilityfromthatinjury,she '6#' hasnotworkedsincetheemployercloseditsfactoryonDecember17,1999. ("$(   Followingherinjury,theclaimantchoseDr.ClaiborneChristian.Dr.Christianprovided *%* conservativecareandorderedamagneticresonanceimagingscan(MRI).TheMRIrevealeda +&+ herniatednucleus_pulposus_Ԁontheleftside.Dr.Christianestimatedherpermanentimpairmentat ,', none,butreferredhertoaneurosurgeon,Dr.John_Brophy_.Dr._Brophy_Ԁagreedwiththediagnosis n-(- andproducedawrittenreport,butexpressednoopinionastotheextentoftheclaimant'spermanent  impairment.ShewasreferredtoDr.RobertBarnett,forexaminationandevaluation.    Dr.Barnettestimatedherpermanentmedicalimpairmentfromtheinjurytobe7percent, t usingAMAguidelines.Avocationalexpertestimatedhervocationalimpairmenttobe95percent, ` considering,amongotherthings,theclaimant'sphysicallimitations.   #  1      ׀Theclaimanttestifiedthatshe L  isunabletowork. 8    Thetrialjudge,aftermakingspecificfindingsoffactasrequiredbyTenn.CodeAnn.506  ` 241,awardedpermanentpartialdisabilitybenefitsbasedonsixtimesthemedicalimpairmentrating  L  or42percent.Appellatereviewisdenovoupontherecordofthetrialcourt,accompaniedbya  8  presumptionofcorrectnessofthefindingsoffact,unlessthepreponderanceoftheevidenceis $  otherwise.Tenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(2).Thistribunalisnotboundbythetrialcourt's   findingsbutinsteadconductsanindependentexaminationoftherecordtodeterminewherethe   preponderancelies._Galloway_Ԁv.MemphisDrumServ.,822S.W.2d584,586(Tenn.1991).Where   thetrialjudgehasseenandheardthewitnesses,especiallyifissuesofcredibilityandweighttobe   givenoraltestimonyareinvolved,considerabledeferencemustbeaccordedthosecircumstanceson p review,becauseitisthetrialcourtwhichhadtheopportunitytoobservethewitnessesdemeanor \ andtoheartheincourttestimony.Longv.TriConInd.,Ltd.,996S.W.2d173,177(Tenn.1999). H Theextentofaninjuredworkersvocationaldisabilityisaquestionoffact.Storyv.LegionIns.Co., 4 3S.W.3d450,456(Tenn.1999).  p   Theappellantarguesthemedicalevidencepreponderatesagainstthetrialcourt'sfindingof H permanencybecauseheshouldhaveacceptedthetestimonyofthetreatingphysician,Dr.Christian. 4 Whenthemedicaltestimonydiffers,thetrialjudgemustchoosewhichviewtobelieve.Indoingso,   heisallowed,amongotherthings,toconsiderthequalificationsoftheexperts,thecircumstances   oftheirexamination,theinformationavailabletothem,andtheevaluationoftheimportanceofthat  informationbyotherexperts.#oXX' #X'XoOrmanv.Williams_Sonoma_,Inc.,803S.W.2d672,676(Tenn.1991).#oXX'#X'XoԀ  Moreover,itiswithinthediscretionofthetrialjudgetoconcludethattheopinionofcertainexperts  shouldbeacceptedoverthatofotherexpertsandthatitcontainsthemoreprobableexplanation. l #oXX'#X'XoHinsonv.WalMartStores,Inc.,654S.W.2d675,6767(Tenn.1983)#oXX' #X'Xo.Fromourindependent X  examinationoftherecord,wearenotpersuadedthetrialcourtabuseditsdiscretionbyacceptingthe D! opinionofDr.Barnett. 0"    Theappellantarguesthattheopinionofthevocationalexpertshouldhavebeenignored $X" becauseitisbasedinpartoninformationprovidedbytheclaimantastoherlimitations.Notably, $D # theclaimantgavesimilartestimonytothetrialjudge,whoexpresslyfoundhertobeatruthful %0!$ person.Trialcourtshavebroaddiscretiontodeterminewhethertoacceptorrejecttheopinionof &"% aprofferedexpert.Wefindnoabuseofthatdiscretioninthiscase. '#& _  Theappellantarguestheawardisexcessivebecausethereisnomedicalevidenceof )$( prescribedrestrictionsorlimitations.Aninjuredemployeeiscompetenttotestifyastoherown  assessmentofherphysicalconditionandsuchtestimonyshouldnotbedisregarded.#oXX'#X'XoWalkerv.  SaturnCorp.,986S.W.2d204,208(Tenn.1998)#oXX'5$#X'Xo.Suchtestimonyshouldbeconsidered.#oXX'$#X'XoԀCollins  v._Howmet_ԀCorp.,970S.W.2d941,943(Tenn.1998). t   Forthosereasons,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.Costsaretaxedtothe L  appellant. 8     `     h     ___________________________________  8     `     h     JOEC.LOSER,JR.,SPECIALJUDGE $      @7 7 oXX'INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE  @??SPECIALWORKERSCOMPENSATIONAPPEALSPANEL  @''%ATJACKSON $ @==August20,2001Session 6    JANIELOUCOBBv.HENRYI.SIEGEL,INC.   Z (@M M  CircuitCourtforCarrollCounty 0  @&No.4036 D  @*AV) ` dE<k` A߈ l  @0 0 No.W200002656_WC_ԄR3CVFiledOctober24,2001   AV) ` dE<` A   @PP& JUDGMENT  ( oo   ` ThiscaseisbeforetheCourtupontheentirerecord,includingtheorder ` ofreferraltotheSpecialWorkers'CompensationAppealsPanel,andthePanel's "r MemorandumOpinionsettingforthitsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw,which 4 areincorporatedhereinbyreference; F    ` Whereupon,itappearstotheCourtthattheMemorandumOpinionofthe j Panelshouldbeacceptedandapproved;and |    ` Itis,therefore,orderedthatthePanel'sfindingsoffactandconclusions  oflawareadoptedandaffirmed,andthedecisionofthePanelismadethejudgment   oftheCourt. ! Ѐ "&    ` CostsonappealaretaxedtotheAppellant,HenryI.SiegelCompany,for #8 whichexecutionmayissueifnecessary. $J     ` ITISSOORDERED. 'n"" #oo*+#o   `     h     PER_CURIAM_ N*%% _#o/##X'Xo'#_