ÿWPCú 1U:¾ %øþn­ 04»ï 0Jï 0T9 0^ 0hëw@S4“ 0r§ 0| 0†• 0 1u« 0d U6„B)º AQãÆ4 0Dú 0@> 0D~ DC D/ B4 BQ D3n AM¡ U *î  f '‚ v~©vÓ'<þ6X9`("Courier 10cpiX#|x «<þ6X9`("Courier 10cpiXÂxþ6X@É“8õ X@( ¤U$¡¡Ó  Ó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô îE D Ó€Ó€ •{:$Ôô2@ 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< Œ 9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d!"#$&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó7Border 1dd(('÷ÿ dxd düÿP Pd'''''ÿÿdxd!#%Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial úÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€+ÔÔ€+ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€+XÔÌÌMarch€5,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó \Ñ\R AØ'\Ñ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€+ÔÔ€+ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€+XÔÌÌMarch€5,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿáùEG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{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  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ Ð ÒÙ€!ÙÑ\R AØ'\ÑßR€*,%A1-j|S ` ç `€€@ÿRßÞ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àSPECIAL€WORKERS'€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELÌÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌÌÌÌTOBY€HEDGECOTH,,€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€Plaintiff/Appellee€€€€€€€)€€No.€01S01„9702„CV„00033€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ï)€€Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìv.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)€€CIRCUIT€COURT€MAURY€COUNTY€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ï)€€ÌHAROLD€MOORE€&€ASSOCIATES€€€€€€€€)€€HON.€JIM€T.€HAMILTON,€JUDGEÌand€JEFF€CASWELL€d/b/a/€€€€€€€€€€)ÌCASWELL€&€SONS€CARPENTRY,€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€Defendants/Appellants€€€€)€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óó)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTSóó:€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€òòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌKENNETH€M.€POLOMBO€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€RALPH€BROWN€€€€€€€€€€€ÌSEAN€ANTONE€HUNT€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€CLINT€J.€WOODFIN€€€€€€€Ì424€Church€Street,€Suite€1350€€€€€€€Suite€304,€Tower€II€€€€€€€€€ÏNashville,€TN€37219€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€412€Executive€Tower€DriveÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Knoxville,€TN€37923Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àòòMEMORANDUM€OPINIONóóÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àMEMBERS€OF€PANELÌÌà@ àLYLE€REID,€ASSOCIATE€JUSTICE,€SUPREME€COURTÌà@ à€W.€MICHAEL€MALOAN,€CHANCELLOR,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÌ€€€€€€€€€€€WILLIAM€S.€RUSSELL,€RETIRED€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌAFFIRMED€AND€REMANDED€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€RUSSELL,€SP.€J.ÌÌÌÓÓÑ7€XXdÈXXdÈ7Ñà àThis€appeal€in€a€workers'€compensation€case€has€beenÏreferred€to€the€Special€Workers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel€ofÏthe€Supreme€Court€in€accordance€with€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÏSection€50„6„225€(e)(3)€for€hearing€and€reporting€to€the€SupremeÏCourt€of€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.Ìà@ àÌà àToby€Hedgecoth,€in€the€course€and€scope€of€his€employment,Ïfell€from€a€rooftop€on€December€18,€1994.€€His€right€foot€struckÏa€brick€and€was€severely€injured.€€He€has€been€unable€to€returnÏto€physically€demanding€work€and€at€the€time€of€trial€wasÏenrolled€in€vocational€school€studying€electronics.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌà àThe€trial€judge€awarded€temporary€total€disabilityÏcompensation€from€the€date€of€the€accident€until€December€11,Ï1995;€permanent€partial€disability€of€75%€to€the€body€as€a€wholeÏand€future€medical€expenses.ÌÌà àThe€employer/appellant€contends€that€the€permanent€partialÏdisability€should€not€have€been€to€the€whole€body€because€theÏinjury€was€to€a€scheduled€member,€that€the€award€of€75%Ïvocational€disability€to€the€body€as€a€whole€is€excessive€andÏthat€temporary€total€disability€payments€should€terminate€as€ofÏJune,€1995.ÌÌà àThe€employee/appellee€seeks€clarification€of€the€judgmentÏwith€regard€to€its€being€paid€in€a€lump€sum€and€an€award€ofÏinterest€upon€the€judgment.ÌÌà àThe€scope€of€our€review€upon€the€issues€of€fact€is€òòdeóó€òònovoóóÏupon€the€record€of€the€trial€court,€accompanied€by€a€presumptionÏof€the€correctness€of€the€findings,€unless€the€preponderance€ofÏevidence€is€otherwise.€€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€Section€50„6„225Ï(e)(2)€(1996€Supplement);€òòLollar€v.€Wal„Mart€Stores,€Inc.óó,€767ÏS.W.€2d€143€(Tenn.€1989).€€When€a€trial€court€has€seen€and€heardÏwitnesses,€especially€where€issues€of€credibility€and€weight€ofÏoral€testimony€are€involved,€considerable€deference€must€beÏaccordedÌÌthe€trial€court's€factual€findings.€€òòHumphrey€v.€DavidÏWitherspoon,€Inc.óó,€734€S.W.€2d€315€(Tenn.€1987).€€However,€whereÏthe€issues€involve€expert€medical€testimony€which€is€contained€inÏthe€record€by€deposition,€as€it€is€in€this€case,€then€allÍimpressions€of€weight€and€credibility€must€be€drawn€from€theÏcontents€of€the€depositions,€and€the€reviewing€court€may€draw€itsÏown€impression€as€to€weight€and€credibility€from€the€contents€ofÏthe€depositions.€€òòOrman€v.€Williams€Sonoma,€Inc.óó,€803€S.W.€2dÏ672,€676„77€(Tenn.€1991).ÌÌà àPermanent€disability€resulting€from€an€injury€to€a€scheduledÏmember€may€be€apportioned€to€the€body€as€a€whole€if€the€injuryÏextends€beyond€the€scheduled€member€and€causes€a€permanent€injuryÏto€an€unscheduled€portion€of€the€body.€€òòThompson€v.€Leon€RussellÏEnterprisesóó,€834€S.W.€2d€927,€929€(Tenn.€1992).ÌÌà àMr.€Hedgecoth€was€treated€by€Dr.€Susan€M.€Pick,€M.D.,€anÏorthopaedic€surgeon.€€She€first€saw€him€on€February€1,€1995,€forÏfollow„up€treatment.€€Surgery€to€hold€his€fractures€in€place€hadÏbeen€done€by€others€immediately€after€his€fall.€€Dr.€PickÏtestified€that€Mr.€Hedgecoth€was€still€on€crutches,€had€quite€aÏbit€of€pain€about€his€foot€and€was€still€having€some€drainageÏabout€the€surgical€incision€and€swelling€of€his€foot.€€X„raysÏrevealed€that€his€foot€had€not€been€restored€to€a€normalÏalignment.ÌÌà àWhen€next€seen€on€March€21,€1995,€his€swelling€had€decreasedÏsomewhat€and€Dr.€Pick€allowed€him€for€the€first€time€to€startÏbearing€weight€on€his€injured€foot.€€When€next€seen€six€weeksÏlater€he€was€still€using€a€cane.€€He€had€pain€and€swelling€in€theÍfoot,€and€still€had€an€area€of€open€wound.€€Dr.€Pick€testifiedÏthat€he€had€some€impingement€on€the€nerves€laterally.€€When€heÏwas€next€seen€on€June€13,€1995,€he€still€had€swelling€and€painÏand€numbness€around€his€surgical€incision€site.€€He€still€had€notÏtotally€healed€in€his€wound.€€When€seen€on€August€29€andÏSeptember€26,€1995,€he€was€having€chronic€pain.€€On€November€7,Ï1995,€he€was€still€having€pain€and€swelling€with€activities.€€Dr.ÏPick€opined€that€on€December€5,€1995,€he€had€then€reached€maximumÏmedical€improvement.€€He€still€had€swelling€about€the€foot,€whichÏshe€opined€was€going€to€be€a€permanent€condition.€€His€foot€wasÏin€a€valgus€mal€alignment,€which€caused€increased€stresses€on€hisÏfoot.€€She€opined€that€he€had€a€52%€lower€extremity€impairment;Ïthat€he€would€not€be€able€to€do€any€significant€climbing€ofÏladders,€scaffolding,€long€distance€walking€and€standing€for€longÏperiods€of€time.€€His€foot€would€swell€after€prolonged€standing,Ïand€probably€cause€more€pain.€€He€could€require€surgicalÏtreatment€for€uncontrolled€pain,€which€would€be€a€fusion€of€hisÏsubtalar€foot€joint.ÌÌà àMr.€Hedgecoth€testified€that€his€heel€injury€causes€him€toÏlimp,€which€causes€his€back€to€hurt€if€he€has€to€walk€too€much€orÏstay€up€too€much.ÌÌà àAppellant€contends€that€temporary€total€disability€shouldÏhave€been€terminated€in€June€of€1995,€because€on€cross„examination€Dr.Pick€testified:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àI€would€have€said€that,€you€know,€if€he€couldÏwork€in€a€sitting€position,€he€probably€couldÏhave€gone€back€to€work€when€I€first€saw€him.€ÏAnd€it€would€have€had€to€have€been€entirelyÏsitting,€and€not€using€his€foot.ÌÌÓÓShe€testified€that€she€would€have€"released"€him€"when€I€got€himÏoff€his€cane.€€Probably€around€June".ÌÌà àGiven€the€nature€of€Mr.€Hedgecoth's€injury,€the€nature€ofÏhis€occupation,€and€the€absence€of€any€proof€that€he€could€doÏsedentary€work,€we€hold€that€his€temporary€total€disabilityÏperiod€was€properly€pegged€to€the€date€of€maximum€medicalÏimprovement,€and€not€the€June€1995€date€advocated€by€theÏappellant.€€A€careful€review€of€his€medical€treatment€does€notÏreflect€a€time€when€he€was€able€to€do€any€work€that€he€wasÏqualified€to€do,€so€the€trial€judge€correctly€looked€to€the€dateÏof€his€maximum€medical€improvement€as€the€terminal€date.€€It€isÏwell€established€that€eligibility€for€temporary€total€benefitsÏceases€when€the€injured€employee€either€is€able€to€return€to€workÏor€attains€maximum€recovery.€€òòSimpson€v.€Satterfieldóó,€564€S.W.€2dÏ953,€955€(Tenn.€1978).ÌÌà àWe€hold€that€the€effects€of€this€foot€injury€went€beyond€theÏscheduled€member€and€justified€the€holding€that€the€disabilityÏwas€to€the€body€as€a€whole.€€We€further€hold€that€the€75%Ïpermanent€partial€whole€body€disability€is€well€supported€by€theÏevidence.ÌÌà àAs€to€the€appellee's€contention€for€a€lump€sum€judgment,€weÏhold€that€the€trial€judge€granted€the€motion€when€he€calculatedÏthe€lump€sum€and€decreed€that€the€75%€permanent€partialÏdisability€to€the€body€as€a€whole€"translates€to€a€money€judgmentÏof€forty„three€thousand€seven€hundred€twenty„two€dollarsÏ($43,722.00)".€€The€record€supports€the€proposition€that€this€isÏin€the€best€interest€of€the€injured€employee.€€Tennessee€CodeÏAnnotated€Section€50„6„229.ÌÌà àWe€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€and€remand€theÏcase€for€the€calculation€of€interest€upon€the€judgment.€€Cost€onÏappeal€are€assessed€to€the€appellant.Ì€ÌÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÓÓóó€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÏWILLIAM€S.€RUSSELL,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌóóLYLE€REID,€ASSOCIATE€JUSTICE€Ì€ÌòòÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌóóW.€MICHAEL€MALOAN,€SPECIAL€JUDGE€€Ñ€-ÑÇÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ X ÑÔ€+Ôà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌßJ€*.;+'b|` ç `€@ÿJßà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌÌÌTOBY€HEDGECOTH,€à àà àà à)€à àMaury€CircuitÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€€6530Ìà àPlaintiff„Appellee,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€Jim€T.€Hamilton,€JudgeÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌHAROLD€MOORE€&€ASSOCIATES€à à)Ìand€JEFF€CASWELL€d/b/a€CASWELLà à)à àNO.€01S01„9702„CV„00033Ì&€SONS€CARPENTRY,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendants„Appellants.€à àà à)à àAffirmed€and€RemandedÌÌÔ€+&ÔÌà@ àòòÔ€+XÔò òJUDGMENT€ORDERóóó óÌÌÌÓÓà àà àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€motion€for€review€pursuant€toÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(5)(B),€the€entire€record,€including€the€order€ofÏreferral€to€the€Special€Workers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel,€and€the€Panel'sÏMemorandum€Opinion€setting€forth€its€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law,€whichÏare€incorporated€herein€by€reference;ÌÌà àà àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€motion€for€review€is€notÏwell„taken€and€should€be€denied;€andÌÌà àà àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Panel's€findings€of€fact€andÏconclusions€of€law€are€adopted€and€affirmed,€and€the€decision€of€the€Panel€is€madeÏthe€judgment€of€the€Court.ÌÌà àà àCosts€will€be€paid€by€the€defendant„appellant€and€its€surety,€for€whichÏexecution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÌà àà àIt€is€so€ordered€this€5th€day€of€March,€1998.ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPER€CURIAMÌReid,€J.,€not€participatingÔ€ÔÓÓ