ÿWPCÕ 6# UN %] 0(c4‹Ÿ®w@¶UBöÆ8ÆþÆÄÆŠ 0JP 0Tš 0^î 0hL 0r´ 0|& 0†¢ 0( 1u¸ 0d- AQ‘ Æâ 0D¨ 0@ì 0D, D/p BŸ B¼ D3ÙU> B)JDCs AM¶U *1-&^v~„vÓ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡WX$3|xÏ °D±²E³´Ó€ÀÁVÂîÃÓ€Ï4*NewsGoth BT RomanLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ !"#%Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó'''÷ÿ dxd düÿP Pd&&&&'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d....7Border 1dd "/Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial 'Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ!"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€1ÔÔ€1ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€1XÔÌÌò òJune€29,€1998ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€1ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ!"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€1ÔÔ€1ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€1XÔÌÌò òJune€29,€1998ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€1ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHØ(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  ellan Geneva ÒÒ  ellan Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÑ „ ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ  ÔÔ€ ÔÑ7€ ÕD %%dÞdÈ7Ñ›Þ ÞÌà@ àò òIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÙ€ ÙœßR€02/A1-j|Ò‘` Å `€€@ÿRß›à@ àSPECIAL€WORKERSðð€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌà@ à(April€13,€1998,€Session)òòÌÌÌÌÌóóSAMMY€MOORE,à àà àà àà à€€€€€)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€€€)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà àà à€€€€€)à àà àGIBSON€COUNTYÏCHANCERYÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€€€)Ìv.à àà àà àà àà àà à€€€€€)à àà àNO.€œ02S01›„9709„CH„00082Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€€€)ÌA.€O.€œSMITH,›à àà àà àà à€€€€€)à àà àHON.€GEORGE€R.€ELLIS,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€€€œ)à àà àCHANCELLOR›Ìà àDefendant/Appellant.à àà à€€€€€)Ìó óÌÌÌÌÌò òòòFor€the€Appellee:à àà àà àà àóó€€€€€òòFor€the€Appellant:ó óóóÌÌEdward€L.€œMartindale›,€Jr.à àà àà à€€€€€Kathryn€S.€œKibbee›ÌDREW€&€œMARTINDALE›,€P.C.à àà à€€€€€œRAINEY›,€œKIZER›,€BUTLER,€œREVIERE›€&ÏBELLÌ470€North€Parkway,€Suite€Cà à€€€€€à à€€€€€P.O.€Box€1147ÌJackson,€TN€38305à àà àà àà à€€€€€Jackson,€TN€38302„1147ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àòòò òMEMORANDUM€OPINIONó óóóÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àò òòòMEMBERS€OF€PANEL:óóó óÌÌà@ àò òJUSTICE€JANICE€M.€HOLDERÌà@ àSENIOR€JUDGE€JOHN€K.€BYERSÌà@ àSPECIAL€JUDGE€J.€STEVEN€STAFFORDó óÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌ̛̜Ìò òÌAFFIRMED,€AS€MODIFIEDà€ àSTAFFORD,€SPECIAL€JUDGEó óÌÌà@ àò òòòOPINIONóóó óÌÌÓÓà àThis€workerððs€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€SpecialÏWorkersðð€Compensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€in€accordanceÏwith€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225(e)€for€hearing€and€reporting€to€theÏSupreme€Court€of€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.Ìà àThe€only€issue€for€the€Panelððs€consideration€is€whether€aÏpreponderance€of€the€evidence€supports€the€trial€courtððs€award€of€48%Ípermanent€partial€disability€to€each€upper€extremity.€€We€find€that€it€doesÏand€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€judgment€as€modified.Ìà àReview€of€the€findings€of€fact€made€by€the€trial€court€is€òòde€novoóóÏupon€the€record€of€the€trial€court,€accompanied€by€a€presumption€of€theÏcorrectness€of€the€findings,€unless€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€isÏotherwise.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(2);€òòStone€v.€City€of€œMcMinnville›,Ïóó896€œS.W.2d›€548,€550€(Tenn.€1995).€€The€application€of€this€standardÏrequires€this€Court€to€weigh€in€more€depth€the€factual€findings€andÏconclusions€of€the€trial€court€in€a€workerððs€compensation€case.€€òòSeeÏœCorcoran›€v.€Foster€Auto€œGMC›,€Inc.,óó€746€œS.W.2d›€452,€456€(Tenn.€1988).€ÏHowever,€considerable€deference€must€be€given€to€the€trial€judge,€who€hasÏseen€and€heard€witnesses€especially€where€issues€of€credibility€andÏweight€of€oral€testimony€are€involved.€€òòJones€v.€Hartford€Accident€andÏIndemnity€Company,€óó811€S.W.2d€516€(Tenn.€1991).Ìà àà@ àò òFACTSÌà àó óThe€plaintiff€is€a€42€year€old€man.€€He€completed€the€ninth€grade€andÏthen€quit€school€to€begin€working.€€He€obtained€his€GED€in€1984.€€He€has€noÏother€formal€vocational€or€educational€training.€€His€work€history€consistsÏof€employment€as€an€automobile€repairman,€general€maintenance€worker,Ílog€scaler,€factory€worker,€warehouse€supervisor,€construction€worker,Ïand€welder.Ìà@ àò òMEDICAL€EVIDENCEó óÌà àAt€the€time€of€the€injury,€the€plaintiff€was€employed€by€theÏdefendant€as€a€welder.€€He€had€experienced€wrist€pain€for€several€yearsÏand€was€first€seen€by€Dr.€Joe€Rowland.€€He€continued€to€have€problems€andÏwas€seen€by€Dr.€Michael€Cobb€on€September€16,€1996.€€Dr.€Cobb€testifiedÏthat€the€plaintiff€complained€of€pain€in€both€wrists€with€the€right€wristÏbeing€worse€than€the€left.€€He€recommended€that€the€plaintiff€be€testedÏœelectro›„diagnostically.€€This€test€was€performed€by€Dr.€Ron€Bingham€andÏrevealed€that€the€plaintiff€was€suffering€from€severe€carpal€tunnelÏsyndrome.Ìà àOn€October€7,€1996,€Dr.€Cobb€performed€carpal€tunnel€surgery€on€bothÏof€the€plaintiffððs€hands.€€Due€to€the€surgery,€the€plaintiff€was€absent€fromÏwork€for€two€days.€€He€was€placed€on€light€duty€until€November€18,€1996,Ïwhen€Dr.€Cobb€returned€him€to€regular€duty.Ìà àSubsequent€to€the€surgery,€the€plaintiff€complained€of€pain€andÏcontinued€problems€with€his€hands.€€Dr.€Cobb€was€unable€to€find€anyÏobjective€basis€for€the€complaints€and€believed€that€the€plaintiff€had€aÏpoor€attitude€and€was€negative€about€his€recovery.€€Due€to€the€plaintiffððsÍcomplaints,€Dr.€Cobb€elected€to€have€a€post„operative€nerve€conductionÏstudy€performed€by€Dr.€Bingham€on€January€8,€1997.€€This€test€revealedÏthat€the€plaintiff€still€maintained€a€moderate€neuropathy€with€his€hands.€ÏDr.€Bingham€performed€a€third€nerve€conduction€study€on€the€plaintiff€onÏApril€9,€1997.€€This€test€also€revealed€that€the€plaintiff€had€moderateÏneuropathy€in€both€wrists.Ìà àDr.€Cobb€testified€that€based€on€the€post„operative€nerve€conductionÏstudies,€the€plaintiff€had€suffered€permanent€nerve€damage€in€both€wrists.€ÏHe€also€stated€that€but€for€the€positive€nerve€conduction€studies,€he€wouldÏhave€given€the€plaintiff€a€zero€impairment€rating.€€Dr.€Cobb€opined€that€theÏplaintiff€had€suffered€a€5%€permanent€partial€impairment€to€each€upperÏextremity€based€upon€the€American€Medical€Association€guidelines.€€HeÏbased€his€assessment€on€his€physical€findings,€continued€complaints€ofÏpain,€and€the€œelectro›„diagnostic€findings.€€He€additionally€based€hisÏopinion€on€an€article€appearing€in€an€American€Medical€AssociationÏnewsletter€entitled€òòð ðCarpal€Tunnel€Syndrome:€Challenges€in€ImpairmentÏRatings.ðð€€óóDr.€Cobb€placed€no€restrictions€on€the€plaintiff.Ìà àOn€January€27,€1997,€Dr.€Joseph€Boals€saw€the€plaintiff€for€anÏindependent€medical€evaluation.€€Dr.€Boals€performed€a€physicalÏexamination€on€the€plaintiff€and€reviewed€the€plaintiffððs€medical€recordsÍincluding€the€nerve€conduction€studies€performed€by€Dr.€Bingham.€€Dr.ÏBoals€stated€that€the€plaintiffððs€hands€were€tender€and€that€he€€wasÏexperiencing€pain.€€He€testified€that€the€plaintiff€would€have€continuingÏdifficulty€if€he€wanted€to€continue€to€work€at€the€job€he€was€doing€andÏthat€it€was€just€a€matter€of€time€before€he€would€be€required€to€quit.€€HeÏfound€the€plaintiff€to€be€very€cooperative€and€honest€in€all€his€efforts.€€Dr.ÏBoals€opined€that€the€plaintiff€had€experienced€a€20%€permanent€partialÏimpairment€to€each€upper€extremity.€€He€recommended€that€the€plaintiffÏbe€retrained€to€get€out€of€using€his€hands€for€heavy€gripping€and€repetitiveÏwork€and€to€go€to€a€more€light€to€sedentary€type€of€job€wherein€onlyÏintermittent€lifting€is€required€with€no€severe€gripping.€€He€stated€thatÏthe€plaintiff€was€a€hand€cripple€waiting€to€happen.Ìà àThe€plaintiff€testified€that€his€hands€continue€to€hurt€him.€€He€hasÏnow€transferred€from€his€welding€job€to€a€side€rail€job.€€He€believed€thatÏthis€job€would€be€easier€for€him€to€do€but€it€has€not€been€so.€€Additionally,Ïhe€is€earning€less€money€at€his€new€job€than€he€was€as€a€welder.€€He€usesÏhis€hands€in€the€same€way€on€his€new€job€as€he€did€when€he€was€a€welder.€ÏHe€is€required€to€grip€and€twist€in€his€new€job€and€he€continues€to€haveÏthe€same€pain€as€he€did€when€he€was€welding.Ìà àThe€plaintiff€is€unable€to€open€fruit€jars€or€Coke€tops€due€to€theÏproblem€with€his€hands.€€In€order€to€relieve€the€pain,€he€is€required€to€takeÏòòAlleve,€Migranex,€óóoròò€Ibuprofenóó€when€he€works.€€The€plaintiff€believes€thatÏhis€hands€are€worse€since€the€surgery.€€He€testified€that€œhis›€hands€hurtÏand€throb€even€when€he€is€not€at€work.€€The€plaintiff€has€not€missed€anyÏwork€because€of€the€problem€with€his€hands.€€He€testified€that€he€justÏbears€the€pain€and€goes€on.Ìà@ àò òANALYSISó óÌà àThe€defendant€asserts€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€determining€theÏplaintiffððs€permanent€partial€disability.€€Apparently,€the€thrust€of€theÏdefendantððs€argument€is€that€the€trial€court€should€have€given€greaterÏweight€to€the€testimony€of€Dr.€Cobb€rather€than€the€testimony€of€Dr.€Boals.€ÏThe€basis€for€this€assertion€is€that€Dr.€Cobb€was€the€treating€physicianÏand€that€he€utilized€an€article€entitled€òòð ðCarpal€Tunnel€Syndrome:ÏChallenges€in€Impairment€Ratingsðð€€óóappearing€in€an€American€MedicalÏAssociation€newsletter€in€forming€his€opinion.€€Dr.€Boals€did€not€utilizeÏthis€article€in€forming€his€opinion.Ìà àWhen€determining€an€employeeððs€medical€impairment,€a€physician€isÏrequired€to€use€either€the€òòAmerican€Medical€Association€Guides€to€theÏEvaluation€of€Permanent€Impairment,óó€theòò€Manual€for€Orthopaedic€SurgeonsÍin€Evaluating€Permanent€Physical€Impairmentóó€or€in€cases€not€covered€byÏeither€of€these,€an€impairment€rating€by€any€appropriate€method€used€andÏaccepted€by€the€medical€community.€€See€T.C.A.€ðð€50„6„241.€€In€this€case,Ïboth€physicians€testified€that€the€medical€impairment€ratings€they€gaveÏthe€plaintiff€were€based€on€theòò€American€Medical€Association€Guides€toÏthe€Evaluation€of€Permanent€Impairment.óó€€The€defendant€has€cited€us€to€noÏauthority€that€would€require€a€physician€to€consider€anything€but€theÏabove€cited€guidelines€when€determining€medical€impairment.€€Therefore,Ïthe€defendantððs€contention€that€Dr.€œBoalsðð›€opinion€on€medical€impairmentÏshould€be€given€less€weight€than€the€opinion€of€Dr.€Cobb€because€he€did€notÏutilize€the€newsletter€article€in€forming€his€opinion€is€without€merit.Ìà àBoth€Dr.€Cobb€and€Dr.€Boals€testified€that€their€ratings€were€based€onÏthe€òòAmerican€Medical€Association€Guides€to€the€Evaluation€of€PermanentÏImpairment.óó€€Dr.€Cobb€testified€that€the€plaintiff€suffered€a€5%€permanentÏpartial€impairment€to€each€upper€extremity.€€Dr.€Boals€testified€that€theÏplaintiff€suffered€a€20%€permanent€partial€impairment€to€each€upperÏextremity.ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àð ðWhen€medical€testimony€differs,€it€is€within€theÏdiscretion€of€the€trial€judge€to€determine€whichÏexpert€testimony€to€accept.ðð€òòœKellerman›€v.€FoodÏLion,€Inc.,€929€S.W.2d€óó333,335€(Tenn.€1996).ÌÌÓÓà àThe€trial€court€has€the€discretion€to€accept€the€opinion€of€oneÏmedical€expert€over€another€medical€expert.€€òòJohnson€v.€œMidwesco›,€Inc.,Ïóó801€S.W.2d€804€(Tenn.€1990).Ìà àIn€this€case,€there€is€a€conflict€of€medical€testimony€as€to€theÏdegree€of€permanent€impairment€assessed€by€the€treating€physician€andÏthe€evaluating€physician.ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àð ðWhile€a€treating€physicianððs€testimony€is€entitledÏto€considerable€weight,€no€rule€of€law€requires€theÏtrial€court€to€accept€the€testimony€of€the€treatingÏphysician€over€any€other€conflicting€medicalÏtestimony.ðð€€òòRing€v.€œCKR›€Industries,€Inc.,€óó23€TAM€4„1,€No.€01301„9702„CV„00031€(Tenn.€1997).ÌÌÓÓà àIn€òòœWorthington›€v.€œModine›€œMfg›.€Co.,óó€798€S.W.2d€233,€234€(Tenn.€1990),ÏChief€Justice€Anderson€writing€for€the€Supreme€Court€stated€that:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àð ðThe€extent€of€vocational€disability€"does€notÏdefinitively€depend€on€the€medical€proof€regardingÏa€percentage€of€anatomical€disability."€Instead,Ï"the€extent€of€a€vocational€disability€is€a€questionÏof€fact€for€the€trial€court€to€determine€from€all€theÏevidence,€including€lay€and€expert€testimony€.€.€.€.ÏThere€is€no€requirement€that€the€trial€court€fixÏpermanent€partial€disability€solely€with€referenceÏto€expert€testimony.€Further,€the€trial€court€mustÏdetermine€the€extent€of€unscheduled€vocationalÏdisability€by€considering€many€factors,€includingÏjob€skills,€education,€age,€training,€duration€ofÏdisabilities,€anatomical€disabilities€established€byÏmedical€experts,€and€local€job€opportunities€for€theÏdisabled.ðð€€(Citations€omitted.)ÌÌÓÓà àIn€making€his€ruling,€the€trial€judge€discussed€the€medical€testimonyÏgiven€by€both€Dr.€Cobb€and€Dr.€Boals.€€It€is€obvious€that€he€considered€theÏtestimony€of€both€physicians€as€well€as€the€plaintiffððs€testimony€inÏdetermining€the€plaintiffððs€permanent€partial€disability.€€After€a€thoroughÏreview€of€the€record,€we€are€unable€to€say€that€the€evidence€preponderatesÏagainst€the€trial€courtððs€award€of€48%€permanent€partial€disability€toÏeach€upper€extremity.Ìà àBoth€Dr.€Cobb€and€Dr.€Boals€testified€that€the€plaintiff€suffered€aÏmedical€impairment€to€the€upper€extremities.€€The€trial€judge€found€thatÏthe€plaintiff€had€suffered€a€permanent€partial€disability€to€both€the€leftÏand€right€upper€extremities.€€This€finding€is€reflected€in€the€finalÏjudgment€entered€by€the€trial€court.€€In€òòContinental€œIns›.€Companies€v.ÏœPruitt›,óó€541€S.W.2d€594,€597€(Tenn.€1976),€the€Supreme€Court€stated€that:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àð ð.€.€.€the€fact€remains€that€an€"upper€extremity"€isÏnot€a€scheduled€member.€This€extremityÏnecessarily€includes€the€fingers,€the€thumb,€theÏhand,€and€the€arm€„€all€scheduled€members,Ïirrespective€of€their€being€included€in€the€termÏ"extremity"€or€"upper€extremity.ððÌÌÓÓà àAfter€reviewing€the€medical€testimony€and€the€plaintiffððsÏtestimony,€the€Panel€finds€that€the€trial€judge€intended€the€award€to€be€toÏboth€arms€as€opposed€to€both€upper€extremities.€€See€T.C.A.€ðð€50„6„207(3)(w).Ìà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€modified€to€show€the€award€ofÏbenefits€to€the€right€and€left€arms€as€opposed€to€the€right€and€left€upperÏextremities.€€In€all€other€respects,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€isÏaffirmed.€€The€appeal€is€dismissed€at€the€defendantððs€cost.ÌÓÓÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àòòà à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ïóóà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òJ.€STEVEN€STAFFORD,€SPECIALÏJUDGEÌó óÌÌÌÌò òCONCUR:ó óÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óó€Ìò òJANICE€M.€HOLDER,€JUSTICEÌó óòòÌÌÌÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌò òJOHN€K.€BYERS,€SENIOR€œJUDGEó óÇÑ ` ÑÔ€1Ôà@ àÔ€1¼ÔIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÔ€1XÔÌÌÌÓ#` Ü…X^ŠÐ X#ÓSAMMY€MOORE,à àà àà à)à àGIBSON€CHANCERYÌÓ#` Ü` ^ŠÐ X#Óà à)à àNO.€12954ÌÓ#` Ü` ¸ ^ŠÐ X#Óà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à à)à àÌà àà à)à àHon.€George€R.€Ellis,Ìvs.à àà à)à àChancellorÌà àà à)ÌA.€O.€SMITH,à à)à àNO.€02S01„9709„CH„00082ÌßJ€03;+'b|T”` Å `€@ÿJßà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellant.à à)à àAFFIRMED,€AS€MODIFIED.ÌÌÌÌà@ àÔ€1¼ÔJUDGMENT€ORDERÔ€1XÔÌÌÓÓÌÓ` p`  ’XÓà àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€the€entire€record,€including€the€orderÏof€referral€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.Ìà àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€Memorandum€Opinion€of€theÏPanel€should€be€accepted€and€approved;€andÌà àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Panel's€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€ofÏlaw€are€adopted€and€affirmed,€and€the€decision€of€the€Panel€is€made€the€judgment€ofÏthe€Court.Ìà àCosts€will€be€paid€by€Appellant,€and€Surety,€for€which€execution€mayÏissue€if€necessary.Ìà àIT€IS€SO€ORDERED€this€29th€day€of€June,€1998.ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPER€CURIAMÌ(Holder,€J.,€not€participating)ÌÌÌÌÞ ÞÌÔ€ Ô›