ÿWPC ¬UÜËëxøîƒª½Ÿýž°€/œ?á=rîT/ùžžœn(ú ®w² ƒ#eyš°Ê´î“E¸ÚÊHßÏô'öqDƒFåÐ]´z €Å¡¨ 2›à o»)S0öñT…)‡æ°™‰E-&•Íì•I“R~.íâ%–ñûÅBȦà[RÏúË‘K3¶×í,${;m+"Xþõ« ‹m¨iV8éN¼¤G5òµ`Ú™®}bwµzz.mtG´a+N•„ží8¸¶à*~ …ø+è+Úír2$q¾ó ¢ásMKgŠä2Œ…µ7Ýøƒo'hÈ"þ®ôƒcÏ>W‰Ýu§> ;ùPjÐÎüS^'µ¼¦3»(ç#£y¬Ê?(Øà . î6ÆÄÿÌWá¥1ŠuôüìÑØ£ËiVõ[qÐ{eSçè©9@ æâDŠÕÐUÉËøsÉœŒIîK!kFѵ³ IšËþ÷z7vÃ2éG‹÷Ò° ä¸Qí’wªœ$_ùØ Ÿ©Õ*0ät 5±(×V¶Í…j,¶áIGªÕªŒfÄÎøR“zûŸ <ùæúºVi’NEå±öÑ›b-p‹ª.½ÒcP2{´ÜÝÞ•7¶‹ Rw¿b#Á\^  %) 0ˆ/ U"N· w 4 z Ò— i x mz ‘ Æ™ Æ_ Æ% Æë N±N³ zµÒ/Eb 0ë     B öö 0¤ D3· D-ê 0K ASbƵ 0¤{ 0D A«c˜HP LaserJet 4 Plus,,,,0 k')L »(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular@Oü(xœA§k1 ÷£ ˜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.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5˜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- ù-(|G2Oâ$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€..ÑÑ8€¤„»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€X³“X»»Ô d(|3$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€..ÑÑ8€¤„»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€..ÑÑ8€¤„»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€¤„»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€¼¤„»»»ÔÑ8€³“XXdð»»d8ÑÓ  ÓÑ  Ñà@@7 7 ìàIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÐ ° ÐSPECIAL€WORKERSðð€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELÐ È Ðà@@ƒƒìàAT€NASHVILLEÐ à0 ÐÌÔ‡X³“X»¼¤„ÔÌò òÔ#†¼¤„»XX³“¹#ÔVALERIE€A.€LEWIS€v.€SATURN€CORPORATIONÔ‡X³“X»¼¤„Ôó óÐ  P ÐÌà@@¼¼ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Chancery€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ  X ÐIrvin€H.€Kilcrease,€Jr.,€ChancellorÐ ø H ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<Ç` AßÐ È  ÐÌNo.€M1999„00422„Ô_ÔWCÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Mailed€May€4,€2000€Ð Ç  ÐFiled€„€September€6,€2000Ð ·  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<–` AßÐ —ç Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThis€workersðð€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€Special€Workersðð€CompensationÐ –æ ÐAppeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€in€accordance€with€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð50„6„225€(e)€(3)€forÐ †Ö Ðhearing€and€reporting€of€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.Ô#†¼¤„»XX³“%#ÔÔ‡X³“X»¼¤„ÔÐ vÆ ÐÓHÓÌò òTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225(e)€(1999)€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Chancery€CourtÐ V¦ ÐAffirmedó óÐ F– ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÓ  ÓWeatherford,€Sr.€J.Ô#†¼¤„»àX³“ž#ÔÔ‡X³“X.¼¤„Ôóó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòBirch,€J.,óó€and€òòGayden,€Sp.€J.óó,Ð &v Ðjoined.Ð f ÐÌThomas€H.€Peebles,€IV€and€K.€Suzanne€Crenshaw,€Columbia,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€SaturnÐ öF ÐCorporation.Ð æ6 ÐÌLloyd€T.€Kelso,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellee,€Valerie€A.€Lewis.Ð Æ  ÐÌÓ…ÓÓ  Óò òMEMORANDUM€OPINIONó óÔ#†¼¤„»XX³“Ç#ÔÔ‡X³“X»¼¤„ÔÐ ¦"ö! ÐÌÓ  ÓÔ#†¼¤„»XX³“¾#ÔÔ‡X³“X»¼¤„Ôà  àThe€trial€court€found€that€employee,€Valerie€A.€Lewis,€suffered€a€compensable€injury€whichÐ †$Ö# Ðarose€out€of€the€course€and€scope€of€her€employment€with€employer,€Saturn€Corporation.€€The€trialÐ v%Æ $ Ðcourt€awarded€employee€twenty€percent€(20%)€permanent€partial€disability€to€the€body€as€a€whole,Ð f&¶!% Ðin€addition€to€all€medical€expenses,€and€future€medical€expenses,€and€temporary€total€disabilityÐ V'¦"& Ðbenefits.Ð F(–#' ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€held€the€employer€was€entitled€to€a€set„off€of€$9,762.93€for€disabilityÐ &*v%) Ðpayments€in€accordance€with€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð50„6„114€(b).Ð +f&* ÐÌà  àThe€trial€court€also€granted€employee€discretionary€costs€in€the€amount€of€$2,846.50.Ð ö,F(, ÐÐ æ-6)-ý Ðà  àThe€employer,€Saturn€Corporation,€raises€on€appeal€€two€issues:€(1)€The€trial€court€erred€inÐ ° Ðfinding€that€employeeððs€back€injury€arose€out€of€the€course€and€scope€of€employeeððs€employment,Ð  ð Ðand€(2)€The€trial€court€erred€in€finding€that€employee€sustained€her€burden€of€proof€as€to€theÐ à Ðcausation€of€her€back€injury.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àThe€employee€raises€on€appeal€two€issues€(1)€the€trial€court€erred€in€holding€that€employerÐ ` ° Ðwas€entitled€to€a€set„off€of€$9,762.93,€and€(2)€the€trial€court€erred€in€awarding€employee€two€(2)Ð P   Ðtimes€her€medical€impairment€instead€of€awarding€two€and€one„half€(2€ðð)€times€her€medicalÐ @  Ðimpairment.Ð 0 € ÐÌà  àAppellate€review€is€de€novo€upon€the€record€of€the€trial€court,€accompanied€by€a€presumptionÐ `  Ðof€correctness€of€the€findings,€unless€the€preponderance€of€evidence€is€otherwise.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ð P  Ððð50„6„225€(e)(2).€€As€discussed€below,€the€panel€has€concluded€that€the€judgment€of€the€trial€courtÐ ð@  Ðshould€be€affirmed.Ð à0  ÐÌà  àEmployee€was€forty„two€(42)€years€old€at€the€time€of€trial.€€She€left€high€school€in€the€12òòthóóÐ À Ðyear€prior€to€graduation.€€She€attended€€Ross€Medical€Education€Center€and€obtained€a€certificateÐ ° Ðas€a€medical„dental€administrator.€€Employee€was€employed€as€a€medical€insurance€biller€for€variousÐ  ð Ðhospitals€and€worked€for€Buick€Motor€Co.€and€Fisher€Body€prior€to€being€employed€at€SaturnÐ à ÐCorporation.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àEmployee€began€working€for€Saturn€Corporation€on€January€16,€1992.€€Employee€did€aÐ `° Ðvariety€of€jobs€at€Saturn,€and€in€1995€she€was€assigned€to€the€ð ðlost€foam€teamðð€where€she€met€fellowÐ P  Ðemployee,€Deborah€Leach,€who€was€a€member€of€the€same€team.€€Employee€and€Ms.€Leach€did€notÐ @ Ðget€along€well.€€Ms.€Leach€complained€about€employee€coming€in€late,€being€out€on€medical,Ð 0€ Ðsleeping€on€the€job€and€having€bad€work€ethics.Ð  p ÐÌà  àOn€October€8,€1996,€employee€had€a€blowout€on€her€way€to€work€and€was€informed€that€herÐ P Ðtire€had€been€slashed€in€a€way€that€would€cause€air€to€leak€out€slowly.€€She€thought€that€Ms.€LeachÐ ð@ Ðhad€something€to€do€with€this,€and€she€and€Ms.€Leach€had€a€conversation€about€the€tire.Ð à0 ÐLater€on€the€same€day,€employee€was€standing€near€a€table€talking€to€Melvin€Brantley,€a€co„worker,Ð Ð  Ðwhen€Deborah€Leach,€carrying€supplies,€approached€the€employee€and€shoved€her€with€her€shoulder.€Ð À! ÐEmployee€fell€back€on€a€table,€rolled€off€the€table€and€landed€in€a€chair.€€Employee€did€not€feel€anyÐ °"  Ðpain€initially.€€She€first€felt€pain€approximately€two€hours€later€when€she€was€at€home€while€tryingÐ  #ð! Ðto€use€the€bathroom.Ð $à" ÐÌà  àEmployee€was€out€of€work€on€vacation€until€October€16,€1996.€€When€employee€returnedÐ p&À!$ Ðto€work€on€October€16,€1996,€she€went€to€Initial€Care€Facility€because€of€pain€in€her€back,€and€fromÐ `'°"% Ðthere€she€was€sent€to€Dr.€Bartsokas.€€Employee€informed€Dr.€Bartsokas€that€she€had€been€pushedÐ P( #& Ðcausing€her€to€twist€through€her€trunk€and€low€back€area€and€developed€low€back€pain.€€She€furtherÐ @)$' Ðrevealed€that€she€had€experienced€back€pain€previously,€apparently€two€months€prior€to€this€incidentÐ 0*€%( Ðand€had€undergone€on€MRI€scan€which€was€entirely€normal.Ð  +p&) ÐÐ ,`'* Ðà  àOn€November€6,€1996,€when€Dr.€Bartsokas€saw€the€employee,€he€entertained€the€possibilityÐ ° Ðthat€she€was€having€some€sort€of€disc€damage€as€a€component€of€her€low€back.€€He€ordered€a€lumbarÐ  ð Ðmyleogram€followed€by€a€CT€scan€which€revealed€that€employee€suffered€from€disc€protusion.€€OnÐ à ÐNovember€18,€1996,€Dr.€Bartsokas€ordered€employee€to€begin€physical€therapy.€€As€a€result€of€herÐ €Ð Ðsuccess€with€physical€therapy,€Dr.€Bartsokas€released€employee€to€return€to€work€on€January€3,€1997Ð pÀ Ðwith€a€twenty„five€pound€(25)€lifting€restriction.Ð ` ° ÐÌà  àWhen€Dr.€Bartsokas€was€asked€if€he€had€formed€an€opinion€to€a€medical€certainty€as€toÐ @  Ðwhether€or€not€the€employeeððs€low€back€pain€and€eventual€surgery€was€caused€by€a€work„relatedÐ 0 € Ðinjury,€he€answered,€ð ðI€think€that€that€was€a€reasonable€contributing€factor€in€her€needing€surgery,Ð  p  Ðyes.ðð€€Ð `  ÐÌà  àEmployee€consulted€Dr.€Shannon€Curtis,€an€orthopedic€surgeon,€at€the€request€of€Dr.Ð ð@  ÐBartsokas.€€Dr.€Curtis€diagnosed€the€employeeððs€problem€as€L.5€radiculopathy,€right€lowerÐ à0  Ðextremity.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àDr.€Curtis€performed€surgery€on€employee€on€April€7,€1997.€€The€surgery€was€successful€andÐ ° ÐDr.€Curtis€opined€that€employee€reached€maximum€medical€improvement€on€July€31,€1997.€€HeÐ  ð Ðallowed€her€to€return€to€work€on€June€2,€1997,€with€restrictions.€€Dr.€Curtis€gave€the€employee€anÐ à Ðimpairment€rating€of€ten€percent€to€the€body€as€a€whole.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àEmployerððs€first€issue€is€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€the€employeeððs€back€injuryÐ `° Ðarose€out€of€the€course€and€scope€of€her€employment.Ð P  ÐÌà  àThe€main€thrust€of€employerððs€argument€is€that€any€injury€received€was€the€result€of€anÐ 0€ Ðintentional€act€by€a€co„employee.€€The€trial€court€concluded€that€this€was€an€intentional€act€by€a€co„Ð  p Ðemployee.€€However,€the€trial€court€further€found€that€the€accident€grew€out€of€a€work„relatedÐ ` Ðdisagreement,€and€therefore€compensable.Ð P ÐÌà  àThe€Supreme€Court€has€held€that€an€assault€growing€out€of€argument€over€performance€ofÐ à0 Ðwork€is€compensable.€€òòW.€S.€Dickey€Manufacturing€Company€v.€Moore,óó€347€S.W.2d€493€(Tenn.Ð Ð  Ð1961).€€The€record€indicates€that€the€alleged€assailant,€Deborah€Leach,€disliked€the€employeeÐ À! Ðbecause€of€her€poor€work€performance,€constant€tardiness,€and€frequent€absenteeism.Ð °"  ÐÌà  àAny€reasonable€doubt€as€to€whether€injury€arose€out€of€employment,€for€compensabilityÐ $à" Ðpurposes,€is€resolved€in€favor€of€employee.€€òòBraden€v.€Sears€Roebuck€and€Company,óó€833€S.W.2dÐ €%Ð # Ð496€(Tenn.€1992).Ð p&À!$ ÐÌà  àAfter€reading€the€entire€record,€we€are€satisfied€that€the€trial€judge€was€well€justified€inÐ P( #& Ðfinding€that€the€employee€sustained€a€compensable€injury.Ð @)$' ÐÌà  àIn€itsðð€second€issue,€the€employer€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€finding€that€employeeÐ  +p&) Ðsustained€an€injury€as€a€result€of€the€October€8,€1996€accident.€€Generally,€a€compensable€injuryÐ ,`'* Ðmust€be€supported€by€medical€proof.€€Both€Dr.€Bartsokas€and€Dr.€Curtis€were€of€the€opinion€thatÐ ° Ðemployee€sustained€an€injury€because€of€the€October€8,€1996€accident.€€Any€reasonable€doubt€as€toÐ  ð Ðwhether€an€injury€arose€out€of€employment€or€not€is€to€be€resolved€in€favor€of€employee€seekingÐ à Ðworkerððs€compensation€benefits.€€òòHall€v.€€Auburntown€Industries,€Inc.€óó,€684€S.W.2d€614€(Tenn.Ð €Ð Ð1985).€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àWe€find€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€finding€of€a€compensableÐ P   Ðinjury€to€the€body€as€a€whole.€Ð @  ÐÌà  àEmployee€argues€on€her€appeal€that€employer€was€not€entitled€to€offset€of€$9,762.93€forÐ  p  Ðdisability€payments€made€to€employee€from€December€17,€1997€through€May€12,€1998.€€At€theÐ `  Ðbeginning€of€the€trial,€employeeððs€attorney€stated,€ð ðI€think€we€can€agree€on€the€issues€of€TTDÐ P  Ðpayments€and€any€set„offs€as€to€disability.ðð€€Nothing€else€in€the€entire€record€contains€anything€aboutÐ ð@  Ða€set„off.€€It€is€improper€to€raise€an€issue€for€first€time€on€appeal.€€We€do€not€deem€this€issueÐ à0  Ðappropriate€for€review.€€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àEmployee€next€argues€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€awarding€employee€a€vocational€disabilityÐ ° Ðof€twenty€percent€(20%)€to€the€body€as€a€whole€rather€than€awarding€two€and€one„half€(2.5)€timesÐ  ð Ðthe€medical€impairment€rating€(25%).Ð à ÐÌà  àThe€record€in€this€case€shows€that€employee€has€returned€to€full€time€work€and€earns€anÐ pÀ Ðamount€that€is€at€least€equal€to€her€earnings€at€the€time€of€injury.Ð `° ÐÌà  àThe€scope€of€review€of€issues€of€fact€is€de€novo€upon€the€record€of€the€trial€court,Ð @ Ðaccompanied€by€a€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€findings,€unless€the€preponderance€of€evidenceÐ 0€ Ðis€otherwise.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð50„6„225€(e)(2).Ð  p ÐÌà  àWhen€a€trial€court€has€seen€and€heard€witnesses,€especially€where€issues€of€credibility€andÐ P Ðweight€of€oral€testimony€are€involved,€considerable€deference€must€be€accorded€the€trial€courtððsÐ ð@ Ðfactual€findings.€€òòHumphrey€v.€David€Witherspoon,€Inc.óó,€734€S.W.2d€315€(Tenn.€1987).Ð à0 ÐÌà  àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€appellant.Ð À! ÐÔ#†¼¤„»XX³“" #ÔÔ€X³“X»¼¤„ÔÐ  °"  ÐÔ‡¼¤„»XX³“Ôà@7 7 ìàIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@§§$ìàAT€NASHVILLEˆÐ È ÐÔ#†X³“X»¼¤„ø3#ÔÌò òÔ‡¼¤„»XX³“ÔÓ  ÓVALERIE€A.€LEWIS€òòóóv.€SATURN€CORPORATIONÔ#†X³“X»¼¤„»4#Ôó óÐ Ð  ÐÓÚ4Óò òÌÌà@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<Ç ` A߈Ð È  ÐÌà@ò ò ìàNo.€M1999„00422„SC„WCM„CV€„€Filed€„€September€6,€2000ˆÐ Ç  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<¦ ` AßÐ § ÷  Ðó óÌÔ‡¼¤„»XX³“ÔÔ#†X³“X»¼¤„„6#Ôà@°°&ìàò òJUDGMENTó óÔ‡¼¤„»XX³“ÔÔ#†X³“X»¼¤„æ6#ԈР¦ö  ÐòòóóÔ‡¼¤„»XX³“ÔÔ#†X³“X»¼¤„D7#ÔÌÔ‡¼¤„»XX³“ÔÔ#†X³“X»¼¤„‡7#Ôà  àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€motions€for€review€of€Saturn€Corporation€and€of€ValerieÐ †Ö  ÐA.€Lewis€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð50„6„225(e)(5)(B),€the€entire€record,€including€the€orderÐ vÆ  Ðof€referral€to€the€Special€Workers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel,€and€the€Panel's€MemorandumÐ f¶  ÐOpinion€setting€forth€its€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law,€which€are€incorporated€herein€byÐ V¦ Ðreference;Ð F– ÐÌà  àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€motion€for€review€of€Saturn€Corporation€is€notÐ &v Ðwell€taken€and€should€be€denied.Ð f ÐÌà  àIt€further€appears€to€the€Court€that€Valerie€A.€Lewisðð€Motion€for€Review€should€be€and€isÐ öF Ðhereby€granted€solely€as€to€the€amount€of€setoff.€€The€Court€concludes€that€the€Special€WorkersððÐ æ6 ÐCompensation€Review€Panel€erred€in€holding€that€the€issue€of€the€amount€of€setoff€was€waived.€€ThisÐ Ö& Ðcase€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€purposes€of€conducting€a€hearing€on€the€issue€of€the€amount,Ð Æ Ðif€any,€of€the€setoff€to€which€the€defendant,€Saturn€Corporation,€may€be€entitled€under€Tenn.€CodeÐ ¶ ÐAnn.€ðð50-6-114(b).Ð ¦ö ÐÌà  àIt€further€appears€to€the€court€that€all€other€issues€presented€in€Valerie€A.€Lewisðð€Motion€forÐ †Ö ÐReview€are€not€well€taken€and€should€be€denied.Ð v Æ ÐÌà  àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Motion€for€Review€of€Valerie€A.€Lewis€is€granted€as€to€theÐ V"¦! Ðissue€of€setoff,€and€this€case€is€remanded€to€the€trial€court€for€proceedings€in€accordance€with€thisÐ F#–" Ðorder.€€The€remainder€of€Valerie€A.€Lewisðð€Motion€for€Review€and€the€Motion€for€Review€of€SaturnÐ 6$†# ÐCorporation€are€denied.Ð &%v $ ÐÌà  àCosts€are€taxed€equally€to€the€parties,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ð 'V"& ÐÌà  àIT€IS€SO€ORDERED.Ð æ(6$( ÐÌÌà@ìà€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€PER€Ô_ÔCURIAMÔ_ԈР¶+'+ ЇBIRCH,€J.,€NOT€PARTICIPATING