WPC Nhp Qв[4z3eۯWM>#159WSsJmJeǿ0JOnP?@]XB$89k1IK:^?B{t`2^=tG-*Lۧ"%<Av86wZ?8d&:`T4[BC1/ގpڸ@l; oQM9ݤۜNٰYqAƙ;!7R/gFaBJUgӋ3?E˝|{roa6 Oњ{!M+ oDKY$m\3)߲Q >|"`9f~wҟXM*%* asawhole.Theclaimanthasappealed. '+w&+    ` XqXXXAppellatereviewisdenovoupontherecordofthetrialcourt,accompaniedbya ,I(-  -2).g _presumptionofcorrectnessofthefindingsoffact,unlessthepreponderanceoftheevidenceis  otherwise.#XXXXq#Tenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(2)(2002Supp.).XqXXXԀThereviewingcourtisrequiredto  conductanindependentexaminationoftherecordtodeterminewherethepreponderanceofthe  evidencelies.#XXXXqU#XqXXXԀWingertv.GovernmentofSumnerCounty,908S.W.2d921,922(Tenn.1995).#XXXXqO#XqXXXThe k standardgoverningappellatereviewoffindingsoffactbyatrialcourtrequirestheSpecialWorkers T CompensationAppealsPaneltoexamineindepthatrialcourtsfactualfindingsandconclusions.#XXXXq#XqXXXԀ =  GAFBldg.Materialsv.George,47S.W.3d430,432(Tenn.2001).#XXXXq#XqXXXԀThetrialcourtsfindingswith & v respecttocredibilityandweightoftheevidencemaygenerallybeinferredfromthemannerinwhich  _ thecourtresolvesconflictsinthetestimonyanddecidesthecase.#XXXXq#XqXXXTobittv.Bridgestone/Firestone,  H Inc.,59S.W.3d57,61(Tenn.2001).#XXXXq#XqXXXԀ#XXXXq#XqXXXԀWherethemedicaltestimonyinaworkerscompensationcase  1  ispresentedbydeposition,thereviewingcourtmaymakeanindependentassessmentofthemedical    prooftodeterminewherethepreponderanceoftheprooflies.#XXXXq#XqXXXWhirlpoolCorp.v.Nakhoneinh,69   S.W.3d164,167(Tenn.2002).#XXXXq'#XqXXX     Conclusionsoflawaresubjecttodenovoreviewonappealwithoutanypresumptionof n  correctness.Nuttv.ChampionIntern.Corp.,980S.W.2d365,367(Tenn.1998).Issuesofstatutory W  constructionaresolelyquestionsoflaw.Bryantv.GencoStamping&Mfg.Co.,33S.W.3d761, @ 765(Tenn.2000).#XXXXq# )y   Theclaimantgraduallydevelopedcarpaltunnelsyndromeandchronicshoulderstrainfrom K repetitiveuseofthehandswhileworkingfortheemployer.Shefirstgavenoticeofherinjuryin 4 1991,butcontinuedworkinguntilJanuary3,1996,whenshebecamedisabledtoworkandhad  correctivesurgery.Shewasalsounabletowork,becauseofpainfromherinjury,fromFebruary  20,1994untilMarch24,1995.Thetrialcourtfoundthedateofinjurytobelate1991.The  claimantcontendsthetrialcourtshouldhaveinvokedthe"lastdayworked"rule.XqXXXThedateofinjury  foragraduallyoccurringinjuryisthedateonwhichtheclaimantisforcedtoquitworkbecauseof q theinjury.#XXXXqH##бXX~ #XXбԀLawsonv.LearSeatingCorp.,944S.W.2d340,343(Tenn.1997)#бXXX#XXб.Wethereforemodify Z thejudgmenttoreflectFebruary20,1994asthedateofinjury.Onremand,thetrialcourtwill C determinetheclaimant'scompensationratebasedonthatdate. ,|   Theclaimantfurthercontendstheawardofpermanentdisabilitybenefitsbasedon12percent N tothebodyasawholeisinadequate.TheXqXXXextentofaninjuredworker'svocationaldisabilityisa  7 questionoffact.#XXXXq##бXX#XXбԀStoryv.LegionIns.Co.,3S.W.3d450,456(Tenn.1999)#бXX_ #XXб.XqXXXOncethecausationand !   permanencyofaninjuryhavebeenestablishedbyexperttestimony,thetrialjudgemayconsider " ! manypertinentfactors,includingage,jobskills,education,training,durationofdisability,andjob #" opportunitiesforthedisabled,inadditiontoanatomicimpairment,forthepurposeofevaluatingthe $# extentofaclaimantspermanentdisability.#XXXXq!##бXX #XXбԀ#бXX,##XXбMcCalebv.SaturnCorp.,910S.W.2d412,416(Tenn. t% $ 1995).#бXXs##XXб ]&!% #бXX$#XXб  TheclaimantisapproximatelyfiftytwoyearsoldandhasaGED.Shehasseenanumber /(#' ofphysiciansandispresentlyondisabilitystatuswithSaturn.Fromtheclaimant'sowntestimony, )h$( whichthetrialcourtweighedandevaluated,aswellasvariedandconflictingmedicalevidence,the *Q%) trialcourtfoundherpermanentdisabilitytobe12percenttothebodyasawhole.Thereis *:&* conflictingmedicalevidenceastowhethertheclaimantexaggeratedhersymptoms.XqXXXWhen_the +#'+ medicaltestimonydiffers,thetrialcourtmustchoosewhichviewtobelieve.Indoingso,thecourt  isallowed,amongotherthings,toconsiderthequalificationsoftheexperts,thecircumstancesof  theirexamination,theinformationavailabletothem,andtheevaluationoftheimportanceofthat  informationbyotherexperts.#XXXXq&#Ormanv.Williams_Sonoma_,Inc.,803S.W.2d672,676(Tenn.1991).XqXXX k Moreover,itiswithinthediscretionofthetrialcourttoconcludethattheopinionofcertainexperts T shouldbeacceptedoverthatofotherexpertsandthatitcontainsthemoreprobableexplanation. =  #XXXXq )#Hinsonv.WalMartStores,Inc.,654S.W.2d675,6767(Tenn.1983).Itappearsfromtherecord & v thatthetrialcourtproperlyexerciseditsdiscretioninthepresentcase.Fromaconsiderationofthe  _ relevantfactors,totheextenttheywereestablishedbytheproofinthiscase,andgivingdue  H deferencetothefindingsofthetrialcourt,wecannotsaytheevidencepreponderatesagainstthetrial  1  court'sfindingastotheextentoftheclaimant'spermanentdisability.      Asmodified,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmedandthecauseremandedtotheCircuit   CourtforMauryCounty.Costsaretaxedtotheparties,onehalfeach.      `     h     ___________________________________ @    `     h     JOEC.LOSER,JR. )y   K __бXX   @ #XXб.#0XXINTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE  @gg$ATNASHVILLE#XX0#/#бXXԈ # @April21,2003Session F #XXб/# бXX  BETTYFRAZIERv.SATURNCORPORATION#XXбT0#  ? s0@tt CircuitCourtforMauryCounty  9 @xx&No.6786  # @*AV) ` dE<` A߈   @ No.M200201564SCWCMCVMailedDecember19,2003   AV) ` dE<]` A ^   бXX#XXб2#@& JUDGMENT бXX#XXб2#Ԉ V  бXX#XXбS3#бXX7 б#XqX 73#  ThiscaseisbeforetheCourtuponthemotionforreviewfiledbySaturnCorporation b pursuanttoTenn.CodeAnn.50-6-225(e)(5)(B),theentirerecord,includingtheorderofreferral K totheSpecialWorkersCompensationAppealsPanel,andthePanelsMemorandumOpinionsetting 4 forthitsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw.    ItappearstotheCourtthatthemotionforreviewisnotwelltakenandisthereforedenied.  ThePanelsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw,whichareincorporatedbyreference,are  adoptedandaffirmed.ThedecisionofthePanelismadethejudgmentoftheCourt. q   Costsareassessedtotheparties,onehalfeach,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary. C #XXXXq3#бXX#XXб7#BIRCH,J.,NOTPARTICIPATING