ÿWPC. 4# èUNó %A 0(Gw@o4¯ÃÒ AQÚ 0l+ 0D—Û 0JÛ 0T% 0^y 0h× 0r? 0|± 0†- 0³ 1uC 0d¸ B Æ9 0Dÿ 0@C 0Dƒ D/Ç Bö D3 U>F B)„ DC­ AMð U*=  g  ‡U6§v~ÝvÓ[˜HP LaserJet 4 PlusHPPCL5MS,ð,,,,,ð0nLHÎ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ D D  D ^e Ó€UîÏeH#3|x!"#$&Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ((3üÝ$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 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 dƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó(('÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd 'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d++++7Border 1dd!#,Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€*ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€.ÔÔ€.ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€.XÔÌÌNovember€14,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€*ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€.ÔÔ€.ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€.XÔÌÌNovember€14,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó< Œ 9p`(Courier NewPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(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€*ÔÝ  Ý›ò òÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7€Œ¯XdðdÈ7ќـ!ÙßR€-/,A1-j|öÿ` ç `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àSPECIAL€WORKERSðð€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌó óÌÌELSIE€HOPKINS,à@ à)à àà àœFRANKLIN›€CHANCERYÌà@ à)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appelleeà@ à)à àà àNO.€01S01„9610„CH„00216Ìà@ à)Ìv.à@ à)à àà àHON.€JEFFREY€F.€STEWART,Ìà@ à)à àà àCHANCELLORÌSAN€ANTONIO€SHOE,€INC.à@ à)Ìà@ à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellantà@ à)Ìà@ à)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌòòÒ€X€ÒFor€the€Appellantóó:ÌÌFred€C.€Statum,€IIIÌBOBO,€HUNT€&€BOBOÌShelbyville,€TennesseeÉòòFor€the€Appellee:óóÌÌFrank€C.€LynchÌLYNCH,€LYNCH€&€LYNCHÌWinchester,€TennesseeÉÒÒÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àò òMEMORANDUM€OPINIONÌÌÌÌó óà@ àMEMBERS€OF€PANELÌÌà@ àLYLE€REID,€ASSOCIATE€JUSTICE,€SUPREME€COURTÌà@ àWILLIAM€S.€RUSSELL,€RETIRED€JUDGEÌà@ àW.€MICHAEL€MALOAN,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌAFFIRMEDà àà àà àà àà àà àMALOAN,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÇÓÓà àThis€Workersðð€Compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€Special€WorkersððÏCompensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€in€accordance€with€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÏðð50„6„225(e)(3)€for€hearing€and€reporting€to€the€Supreme€Court€of€findings€of€fact€andÏconclusions€of€law.Ìà àOn€May€2,€1994,€the€plaintiff,€Elsie€Hopkins,€fell€at€work€and€injured€her€right€shoulder.€ÏAt€trial€and€on€appeal€the€defendant,€San€Antonio€Shoe,€Inc.,€€accepted€the€claim€as€compensable.€ÏThe€trial€court€awarded€thirty„five€percent€(35%)€permanent€partial€disability€to€the€body€as€a€wholeÏand€assessed€a€bad€faith€penalty€of€twenty€percent€(20%)€of€the€temporary€total€disability€benefitsÏdue€in€accordance€with€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð50„6„225(k).€€The€defendant€employerÏcontends€on€appeal€the€evidence€preponderates€against€a€vocational€disability€award€of€thirty„fiveÏpercent€(35%)€permanent€partial€disability€to€the€body€as€a€whole€and€any€finding€of€bad€faith.€€TheÏplaintiff€requests€an€award€of€post€judgment€interest.€€For€the€reasons€stated€in€this€opinion,€theÏjudgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.Ìà àThe€scope€of€review€of€issues€of€fact€is€òòde€novoóó€upon€the€record€of€the€trial€court,Ïaccompanied€by€a€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€findings,€unless€the€preponderance€ofÏevidence€is€otherwise.€€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€50„6„225(e)(2).€€òòLollar€v.€Wal„Mart€Stores,ÏInc.óó,€767€S.W.2d€143€(Tenn.€1989).€€When€a€trial€court€has€seen€and€heard€witnesses,€especiallyÏwhere€issues€of€credibility€and€weight€of€oral€testimony€are€involved,€considerable€deference€mustÏbe€accorded€the€trial€courtððs€factual€findings.€€òòHumphrey€v.€David€Witherspoon,€Inc.óó,€734€S.W.2dÏ315€(Tenn.€1987).€€However,€where€the€issues€involve€expert€medical€testimony€which€isÏcontained€in€the€record€by€deposition,€as€it€is€in€this€case,€then€all€impressions€of€weight€andÏcredibility€must€be€drawn€from€the€contents€of€the€depositions,€and€the€reviewing€court€may€drawÏits€own€impression€as€to€weight€and€credibility€from€the€contents€of€the€depositions.€€òòOverman€v.ÏWilliams€Sonoma,€Inc.óó,€803€S.W.2d€672,€676„77€(Tenn.€1991).Ìà àPlaintiff,€Elsie€Hopkins,€is€48€years€of€age€and€has€a€tenth€grade€education€.€€Her€priorÏwork€history€consists€of€repetitive€work€in€the€garment€and€shoe€industry€and€she€has€noÍvocational€training.€€She€was€employed€by€the€defendant,€San€Antonio€Shoe,€Inc.,€forÏapproximately€8€years€when€she€injured€her€right€shoulder€on€May€2,€1994.€€She€reported€theÏinjury€to€her€employer€and€was€taken€by€her€supervisor,€Paul€Darrow,€to€be€seen€by€Dr.€JackÏMilam.€€Dr.€Milam€treated€her€conservatively€and€placed€her€arm€in€a€sling€for€6€to€8€weeks.€ÏMr.Darrow€filmed€another€employee€doing€Ms.€Hopkinsðð€job€and€showed€the€film€to€Dr.€Milam.€ÏAs€a€result,€Ms.€Hopkins€was€returned€to€her€regular€duties€after€3€weeks.€€Ms.€HopkinsÏcontinued€to€be€treated€by€Dr.€Milam€until€November,€1994.€€On€each€visit€to€Dr.€Milam,€plaintiffÏhad€to€seek€permission€from€the€company€and€on€each€occasion€she€was€accompanied€by€Mr.ÏDarrow.€€Ms.Hopkins€was€subsequently€treated€by€Dr.€Richard€Bagby,€an€orthopedic€surgeonÏfrom€November,€1994,€until€March,€1995.€€Ms.€Hopkins€again€had€to€obtain€permission€to€visitÏDr.€Bagby€and€on€each€occasion€the€office€manager,€Joan€Smith,€would€accompany€her€andÏremain€in€the€examining€room€while€being€treated€by€Dr.€Bagby.€€On€one€occasion€Ms.€Smith€toldÏDr.€Bagby€ð ðsheððs€got€in€her€head€she€has€pulled€muscles€and€ligaments.ðð€€Dr.€Bagby€released€Ms.ÏHopkins€in€March,€1995,€and€stated€there€was€nothing€more€he€could€do€for€her.€€Ms.HopkinsÏrequested€a€second€opinion€and€selected€Dr.€Keith€Brown€from€a€panel€of€physicians.€€Dr.€BrownÏexamined€Ms.€Hopkins€in€March€of€1995€and€recommended€surgery.€€Joan€Smith€asked€Dr.ÏBagby€to€review€Dr.€Brownððs€finding€and€give€his€opinion€as€to€whether€Ms.€Hopkins€neededÏsurgery.€€When€Dr.€Bagby€disagreed€with€Dr.€Brown,€the€defendant€sent€the€following€letter€ofÏApril€19,€1995,€to€Ms.€Hopkins:ÌÓÓà8 àDear€Ms.€Hopkins:Ìà0 àÌà0 àApproximately€1€year€ago€you€fell€outside€the€SAS€factory€on€your€way€to€work.€€SinceÏthat€time€we€have€thoroughly€investigated€the€circumstances€of€your€accident.€€We€haveÏcome€to€the€conclusion€that€there€was€no€negligence€on€the€part€of€SAS€and€that€yourÏinjuries€are€not€work€related.€€Despite€these€findings€SAS€has€paid€you€compensation€andÏmedical€expenses.€€We€have€attempted€to€provide€you€with€the€best€medical€care€possibleÏwhich€included€obtaining€a€second€opinion€on€your€treatment.€€In€light€of€the€circumstancesÏof€your€injury€and€the€consideration€already€extended€by€the€company,€we€will€no€longerÏbe€responsible€for€any€benefits€or€medical€expenses€for€your€injury.€€If€you€would€like€aÏleave€of€absence,€we€will€do€our€best€to€accommodate€you.€€If€you€have€any€questions,Ïplease€feel€free€to€contact€me.ÌÌà àSincerely,Ìà àLew€HaydenÌÌÓÓà àOn€April€22,€1995,€a€conference€was€held€with€Ms.€Hopkins,€Joan€Smith,€and€plantÏmanager€Ned€Hindman.€€Ms.€Hopkins€was€told€to€go€to€a€doctor€of€her€choice€and€to€file€anyÏmedical€expenses€with€her€group€health€insurance€carrier€and€no€further€workerððs€compensationÏbenefits€would€be€afforded€to€her.ÌÇà àMs.€Hopkins€was€then€seen€by€Dr.€Gary€Stevens€who€referred€her€to€Dr.€Burton€Elrod€onÏJuly€28,€1995.€€Dr.€Elrod€performed€surgery€on€September€6,€1995,€to€repair€her€rotator€cuff€andÏresection€the€distal€clavicle.€€She€was€released€to€full€duty€on€February€21,€1996.€€Dr.€Elrod€was€ofÏthe€opinion€she€had€six€percent€(6%)€permanent€partial€impairment€to€the€body€as€a€whole,€and€heÏrecommended€Ms.€Hopkins€restrict€her€overhead€and€heavy€lifting€and€reaching€with€her€armsÏextended.€€Ms.€Hopkins€returned€to€work,€but€she€has€not€been€as€productive,€nor€has€she€earnedÏas€much€as€before€her€injury.Ìà àAt€the€conclusion€of€a€trial€on€May€10,€1996,€the€trial€court€awarded€thirty„five€percentÏ(35%)€permanent€partial€disability€to€the€body€as€a€whole€which€was€within€one€percent€(1%)€ofÏthe€maximum€award€of€six€(6)€times€the€impairment€rating€set€forth€in€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÏðð50„6„241.€€Temporary€total€benefits€in€the€amount€of€$4,606.10€were€awarded.€€The€trial€courtÏfound€the€defendant€to€have€exercised€bad€faith€in€the€denial€of€benefits€and€awarded€a€twentyÏpercent€(20%)€penalty€on€the€unpaid€temporary€total€disability€benefits€or€$921.22€pursuant€toÏTennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð50„6„225(k).Ìà àTennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð50„6„241(a)(1)€requires€the€trial€court€to€consider€all€pertinentÏfactors,€including€lay€and€expert€testimony,€employeeððs€age,€education,€skills€and€training,€localÏjob€opportunities,€and€capacity€to€work€at€types€of€employment€available€in€claimantððs€disabledÏcondition€in€determining€the€extent€of€an€injured€workerððs€permanent€disability.€€From€aÏconsideration€of€all€these€factors,€we€are€not€persuaded€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trialÏcourtððs€award€of€thirty„five€percent€(35%)€to€the€body€as€a€whole.Ìà àTennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð50„6„225(k)€provides:ÌÓÓà8 à(k)€If€an€employer€wrongfully€fails€to€pay€an€employeeððs€claim€for€temporary€totalÏdisability€payments,€the€employer€shall€be€liable,€in€the€discretion€of€the€court,€toÏpay€the€employee,€in€addition€to€the€amount€due€for€temporary€total€disabilityÏpayments,€a€sum€not€exceeding€twenty„five€percent€(25%)€of€such€temporary€totalÏdisability€claim;€provided,€that€it€is€made€to€appear€to€the€court€that€the€refusal€toÏpay€such€claim€was€not€in€good€faith€and€that€such€failure€to€pay€inflicted€additionalÏexpense,€loss€or€injury€upon€the€employee;€and€provided€further,€that€suchÏadditional€liability€shall€be€measured€by€the€additional€expense€thus€entailed.ÌÌÓÓà àThe€trial€court€found€the€defendant€employer€acted€in€bad€faith€in€denying€plaintiffððsÏbenefits.€€The€defendant€employer€attempts€to€justify€its€actions€as€a€dispute€between€Dr.€BagbyÏand€Dr.€Elrod€as€to€whether€plaintiff€needed€surgery.€€However,€the€defendantððs€letter€of€April19,Ï1995,€does€not€terminate€her€benefits€on€the€basis€of€Dr.€Bagbyððs€medical€opinion.€€The€statedÏreason€to€terminate€her€benefits€was€ð ðthere€was€no€negligence€on€the€part€of€SAS€and€that€yourÏinjuries€are€not€work€related.ðð€€This€letter€and€the€defendantððs€improper€attempts€to€control€theÏplaintiffððs€medical€treatment€clearly€show€to€this€panel€the€employerððs€decision€to€terminate€benefitsÏwas€in€total€disregard€of€the€Workerððs€Compensation€law,€without€any€basis€in€fact,€and€in€badÏfaith.€€Ms.€Hopkins€testified€she€was€required€to€rely€on€loans€and€gifts€from€friends,€family,€andÏher€church€to€meet€her€financial€obligations€while€her€benefits€were€terminated.€€The€evidence€doesÏnot€preponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€assessment€of€a€twenty€percent€(20%)€bad€faith€penalty.Ìà àThe€panel€further€finds€the€plaintiff€is€entitled€to€interest€on€the€judgment€of€May€23,€1996,Ïto€present,€pursuant€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð50„6„225(h)(1)€as€the€entire€award€ofÏpermanent€partial€disability€and€temporary€total€disability€benefits€have€all€accrued.€€òòWoodall€v.ÏHamlettóó,€872€S.W.2d€677€(Tenn.€1994);€òòWest€American€Insurance€Co.€v.€Montgomeryóó,€861ÏS.W.2d€230,€232€(Tenn.€1993).Ìà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€This€appeal€is€dismissed€at€defendantððs€costs.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________à àà àà àà àà àà àà àW.€Michael€Maloan,€Special€JudgeÌÌÌConcur:ÌÌÌÌ_______________________________________ÌLyle€Reid,€JusticeÌÌÌ______________________________________ÌWilliam€S.€Russell,€Senior€œJudgeÌÇÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ £ ÒòòÔ€*¼Ôà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌßJ€-0;+'b|_` ç `€@ÿJßÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌÌELSIE€HOPKINS,à àà àà àà à}à àFRANKLIN€CHANCERYÌà àà àà àà àà àà à}à àNo.€14,417€BelowÌà àPlaintiff/Appelleeà àà àà à}Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à}à àHon.€Jeffrey€F.€Stewart,€Ìvs.à àà àà àà àà àà à}à àChancellorÌà àà àà àà àà àà à}ÌSAN€ANTONIO€SHOE,€INC.,à àà à}à àNo.€01S01„9610„CH„00216Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à}Ìà àDefendant/Appellantà àà à}à àAFFIRMED.ÌÌÌà@ àJUDGMENT€ORDERÌÌÌÓ€Óà àà àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€the€entire€record,€including€theÏorder€of€referral€to€the€Special€Workers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel,€and€theÏPanel's€Memorandum€Opinion€setting€forth€its€findings€of€fact€and€conclusionsÏof€law,€which€are€incorporated€herein€by€reference.Ìà àà àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€Memorandum€OpinionÏof€the€Panel€should€be€accepted€and€approved;€andÌà 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€isÏmade€the€judgment€of€the€Court.ÌÓ ` ` šXÓà àà àCosts€will€be€paid€by€San€Antonio€Shoe,€Inc.,€Principal,€and€Surety,Ïfor€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÓÓà àà àIT€IS€SO€ORDERED€on€November€14,€1997.ÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPER€CURIAMÌóóÌÌÌÌÌÌÌ̜Ԁ1ÔÔ€1Ô›