ÿWPC¤ ÷xµ%ÂßÝÖ% ˜™UÔ­V:hHÆšØqJ ðJøS-ù:Ê*ÝlÝmARk¦áËpüvË ÿ'à÷ £ÒôÞŒ_´ºà?R‡ø¬ÓbW£,o¦Â¹a>ô&m¯d¸0’FNºîèߟ¿ˆÚiïkUÕ5ž]ÁÛ~˜Fo:œöý,$:•Õ`](€‰‰Ã&ˆüYήK'œÿ5KMøJïcŠëóÀÝÒŸ¥¦Nu´UÅ}8f±ÍäªHÖ 9AâUàÜz;÷ª*ÖœTÏö¢{&`ýšÅ3§1:9öàÌ º4¼T‡ä£©.U45ŠV[¬“·#:¦Aù˜¿ÂÖWEU6z­AhñdêcÇË@Ûiü¹8n±ðGɯïW¹ŸòjÄ÷¼‚K{ÇØ«É(õóýeJ®”¿ )é“0”ÿ´ëèÈñ@“ô.‹ÀjzÓå´‘øFNß’ 6(•–èÎãÌÂäïÜoy,Ò³ƒ”‚»/¬^/ÜŒŒC$éÕ¸Æ3“3¯kRçWq}*Ž%) Ðâ âperforming€manual€labor€in€factories.€€Prior€to€1993,€she€lived€in€Addison,€Illinois,€and€moved€toÐ *+z&*ý3 ÐTennessee€that€year€with€her€ex„husband.׃×Ý ƒ%ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Prior€to€her€employment€with€Ô_ÔMRTÔ_Ô€and€Defendant,€whoÐ ° Ðâ âtook€over€Ô_ÔMRTÔ_Ô,€Plaintiff€worked€for€Johnson€Controls€in€Lexington,€Tennessee,€testing€seat€tracksÐ œì Ðfor€cars.€€When€Plaintiff€went€to€work€for€Ô_ÔMRTÔ_Ô,€she€was€a€ð ðBðð€operator.€€This€work€consisted€ofÐ ˆØ Ðshoveling,€squeegeeing€off€the€floor,€pulling€samples,€and€driving€a€forklift€and€front€end€loader.€Ð tÄ ÐShe€became€an€ð ðAðð€operator€in€the€control€room,€but€when€Defendant€took€over€Ô_ÔMRTÔ_Ô,€she€wasÐ `° Ðtransferred€back€to€a€ð ðBðð€operator.€€Plaintiffððs€primary€work€responsibility€was€to€keep€the€seal€pansÐ L œ Ðclean,€unload€coal€trucks,€fill€charge€buckets,€and€shovel€and€hoe€out€the€seal€pans€which€wouldÐ 8 ˆ Ðaccumulate€mud.€€Also,€this€cleaning€process€required€the€use€of€a€three„inch€vacuum€hose.€€Twenty„Ð $ t Ðfive€percent€(25%)€of€her€work€consisted€of€this€repetitive€shoveling,€hoeing€and€vacuuming€of€theÐ  ` Ðseal€pans.€€Prior€to€February€of€1999,€Plaintiff€had€no€work„related€injuries.Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àIn€January€1999,€she€advised€her€supervisors€that€her€right€arm€felt€like€dead€weight€and€wasÐ Ô$  Ðnumb.€€She€saw€her€family€doctor€who€advised€her€that€she€may€have€carpal€tunnel€and€to€advise€herÐ À  Ðemployer.€€The€company€sent€her€to€see€Dr.€Kenneth€Warren,€who€referred€her€to€Dr.€RonaldÐ ¬ü  ÐBingham€for€carpal€tunnel€testing.€€As€a€result€of€the€test,€Dr.€Warren€referred€Plaintiff€to€Dr.Ð ˜è  ÐClaiborne€Christian€for€carpal€tunnel€syndrome.€Eventually,€€Dr.€Christian€performed€surgery€on€herÐ „Ô  Ðright€arm€on€Friday,€February€26,€1999.€€She€returned€to€light€duty€the€following€Monday€andÐ pÀ Ðremained€on€light€duty€for€six€weeks.€€During€this€six€weeks,€Plaintiff€was€still€seeing€Dr.€ChristianÐ \¬ Ðevery€couple€of€weeks€until€she€was€returned€to€full€duty.€€Her€shoulder€pain€and€numbness€wentÐ H˜ Ðaway€after€surgery.€€Plaintiff€testified€that€in€June€1999,€she€began€developing€numbness€and€painÐ 4„ Ðin€her€left€hand.€€The€company€referred€her€back€to€Dr.€Christian.€After€seeing€Dr.€Christian€aÐ  p Ðnumber€of€times€and€having€another€test,€Dr.€Christian€performed€surgery€on€her€left€hand.€€PlaintiffÐ  \ Ðreturned€to€full€duty€in€April€2000.€€Since€both€surgeries,€Plaintiff€testified€that€she€has€re„occurringÐ øH Ðnumbness/tingling,€more€in€the€right€hand€than€the€left.€€The€numbness€has€affected€her€work€andÐ ä4 Ðhome€chores€in€that€while€performing€shoveling€or€vacuuming,€she€must€stop€and€rest.€€She€has€notÐ Ð  Ðcomplained€to€her€supervisors,€as€she€does€not€want€to€sound€ð ðwhiny.ðð€€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àOn€behalf€of€Defendant,€Mr.€Jimmy€Sloop,€plant€superintendent,€testified€that€Plaintiff€is€oneÐ ”ä Ðof€his€best€employees.€€She€does€a€good€job,€does€not€complain€and€approximately€twenty„fiveÐ €Ð Ðpercent€(25%)€of€her€work€is€repetitive.€€He€would€be€happy€to€recommend€her€for€an€ð ðAðð€operatorÐ l¼ Ðposition,€but€there€are€no€openings€and€none€seem€to€be€available€in€the€immediate€future.€€Mr.€SloopÐ X ¨ Ðconfirmed€that€Plaintiff€worked€a€twelve„hour€shift,€three€days€a€week€and€averaged€1.3€hours€ofÐ D!” Ðovertime€daily.€Ð 0"€  ÐÌÓ  Óò òMEDICAL€EVIDENCEÐ $X" Ðó óÓ  Óà0  àÐ (#(# ÐÓ  Óà  àPlaintiff€was€seen,€initially,€by€Dr.€Warren€on€February€9,€1999,€who€referred€her€to€Dr.€Ð à%0!$ ÐBingham€for€a€nerve€conduction€test.€€As€a€result€of€the€test€indicating€severe€entrapment€neuropathyÐ Ì&"% Ðof€the€median€nerve€in€right€wrist,€Dr.€Warren€referred€Plaintiff€to€Dr.€Christian€for€possible€carpalÐ ¸'#& Ðtunnel€release.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÐ )à$( Ðà  àDr.€Christian,€an€orthopedic€specialist,€filed€a€C„32,€Department€of€Labor€Standard€FormÐ ° ÐMedical€Report€for€Industrial€Injuries€on€October€16,€2000.€€Utilizing€the€AMA€Guidelines€forÐ œì Ðevaluation€of€permanent€impairment,€Dr.€Christian€opined€that€Plaintiff€sustained€a€two€percent€(2%)Ð ˆØ Ðpermanent€impairment€to€the€right€upper€extremity€and€a€two€percent€(2%)€permanent€impairmentÐ tÄ Ðto€the€left€upper€extremity.€€Dr.€Christian€began€Plaintiffððs€treatment€in€February€1999,€upon€aÐ `° Ðreferral€from€Dr.€Warren€for€possible€carpal€tunnel€syndrome.€€A€previous€nerve€conduction€studyÐ L œ Ðindicated€a€severe€motor€and€sensory€involvement€of€her€median€nerve€with€carpal€tunnel€syndrome.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐAfter€discussing€in€detail€this€problem€with€Plaintiff,€Dr.€Christian€recommended€carpal€tunnelÐ $ t Ðrelease.€Plaintiff€agreed.€€On€Friday,€February€26,€1999,€Dr.€Christian€performed€carpal€tunnelÐ  ` Ðrelease€on€Plaintiffððs€right€hand.€€On€the€following€Monday,€Plaintiff€returned€to€work€on€light€duty.€Ð ü L  ÐDr.€Christian€examined€Plaintiff€four€times€between€March€1,€1999€and€April€27,€1999,€and€believedÐ è 8  Ðshe€was€doing€well,€although€she€complained€of€discomfort€in€her€right€hand€and€palm.€€Dr.Ð Ô$  ÐChristian€returned€Plaintiff€to€full€work€duty€on€April€27,€with€no€restrictions.€€Dr.€ChristianÐ À  Ðexamined€Plaintiff€on€May€25€and€June€24,€1999.€€Plaintiff€advised€Dr.€Christian€that€she€still€hadÐ ¬ü  Ðdiscomfort€and€some€difficulty€on€the€job.€€On€June€24,€1999,€Dr.€Christian€opined€that€PlaintiffÐ ˜è  Ðreached€maximum€medical€improvement€and€based€upon€continued€subjective€complaints,€PlaintiffÐ „Ô  Ðsustained€a€two€percent€(2%)€permanent€impairment€to€the€upper€right€extremity.€€Plaintiff€shouldÐ pÀ Ðhave€no€long€term€restrictions.€Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àDr.€Christian€saw€Plaintiff€on€July€15,€1999,€when€she€complained€of€pain€in€her€left€handÐ 4„ Ðbeginning€in€June€1999.€€A€physical€examination€indicated€a€positive€Ô_ÔTinelÔ_Ôððs€and€positive€Ô_ÔPhalenÔ_ÔððsÐ  p Ðtest€with€no€atrophy.€€Plaintiff€was€sent€to€Dr.€Bingham€for€an€Ô_ÔEMGÔ_Ô,€nerve€conduction€test.€€TheÐ  \ ÐÔ_ÔEMGÔ_Ô€indicated€that€Plaintiff€had€early€median€neuropathy€on€the€left.€€On€September€27,€1999,€€Dr.Ð øH ÐChristian€determined€that€Plaintiff€had€possible€carpal€tunnel€syndrome€to€the€left€and€that€PlaintiffÐ ä4 Ðmay€need€surgery.€€After€conservative€treatment,€on€January€24,€2000,€€Dr.€Christian€opined€thatÐ Ð  ÐPlaintiff€had€progressed€to€carpal€tunnel€syndrome.€€As€of€February€14,€Plaintiff€had€not€respondedÐ ¼  Ðto€treatment€and€on€Friday,€March€10,€2000,€Dr.€Christian€performed€carpal€tunnel€release€onÐ ¨ø ÐPlaintiff.€€As€before,€Plaintiff€returned€to€work€on€light€duty€the€following€Monday.€€Between€MarchÐ ”ä Ð13€and€May€23,€2000,€Dr.€Christian€examined€Plaintiff€four€times.€€Plaintiff€did€reasonably€well,€butÐ €Ð Ðstill€had€some€occasional€problems€with€pain,€numbness€and€tingling€in€her€left€hand.€€Plaintiff€isÐ l¼ Ðdoing€her€regular€job.€€Dr.€Christian€stated:€ð ðI€believe€she€had€a€good€operative€release€at€the€time.€Ð X ¨ ÐShe€is€certainly€better€than€she€was€preoperatively,€but€if€she€chooses€to€go€back€and€do€the€job€thatÐ D!” Ðcaused€the€problem€in€the€first€place,€then€the€consequence€of€that€will€be€the€possibility€of€continuedÐ 0"€  Ðsubjective€complaints€as€we€discussed€prior€to€the€surgical€release.ðð€€Dr.€Christian€opined€thatÐ #l! ÐPlaintiff€reached€MMI€and€sustained€a€two€percent€(2%)€permanent€partial€impairment€to€the€leftÐ $X" Ðupper€extremity.€€Plaintiff€had€no€restrictions.€Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àAt€the€request€of€counsel,€on€November€29,€1999,€Dr.€Joseph€C.€Ô_ÔBoalsÔ_Ô,€III,€an€orthopedicÐ Ì&"% Ðspecialist,€examined€Plaintiff€for€bilateral€wrist€pain.€€After€reviewing€Plaintiffððs€work,€medicalÐ ¸'#& Ðhistory€and€completing€a€physical€examination,€Dr.€Ô_ÔBoalsÔ_Ô€opined€that€Plaintiff€suffered€fromÐ ¤(ô#' Ðresiduals€from€right€carpal€tunnel€release€and€ongoing,€mild€carpal€tunnel€syndrome,€left.€€UtilizingÐ )à$( ÐTable€34,€page€65€of€the€AMA€Guides,€Dr.€Ô_ÔBoalsÔ_Ô€opined€that€Plaintiff€has€an€impairment€of€tenÐ |*Ì%) Ðpercent€(10%)€to€the€right€upper€extremity.€€According€to€Table€16,€page€57€of€the€AMA€Guides,Ð h+¸&* ÐPlaintiff€would€qualify€for€a€ten€percent€(10%)€impairment€to€the€left€upper€extremity.€€PlaintiffÐ ° Ðshould€avoid€repetitive€work€and€heavy€gripping€in€the€future.€Ð œì ÐÌà  àOn€August€15,€2000,€Dr.€Ô_ÔBoalsÔ_Ô,€again€re„examined€Plaintiff€following€surgery€to€her€leftÐ tÄ Ðhand.€€Plaintiff€complained€of€numbness€returning€to€her€hands.€€Dr.€Ô_ÔBoalsÔ_Ô€opined€that€Plaintiff€hadÐ `° Ða€ten€percent€(10%)€impairment€of€the€left€upper€extremity€based€upon€her€surgery.€€Plaintiff€hasÐ L œ Ðanatomic€change€from€surgery€and€is€supported€by€her€grip€strength€loss.€€Plaintiff€should€avoidÐ 8 ˆ Ðrepetitive€work€and€heavy€gripping€in€the€future.€Ð $ t ÐÌÓ  Óò òLEGAL€ANALYSISÐ ü L  ÐÌó óÓ  Óà  àDefendant€asserts€that€the€trial€courtððs€award€of€thirty„five€percent€(35%)€permanent€partialÐ Ô$  Ðdisability€is€excessive€and€preponderates€against€the€evidence.€€Defendant€contends€that€this€Court,Ð À  Ðunder€its€reviewing€authority€of€medical€evidence,€should€give€greater€weight€to€that€of€Dr.€Christian,Ð ¬ü  Ðthe€treating€physician.€€òòSeeóó€òòÔ_ÔCrossnoÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔPublixÔ_Ô€Shirt€Factory,€óó814€S.W.2d€730€(Tenn.€1991).Ð ˜è  ÐFurthermore,€Plaintiffððs€vocational€disability€as€a€result€of€this€injury€is€minimal,€if€any.€Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àAppellate€review€of€findings€of€fact€is€òòde€novo€óóupon€the€record€of€the€trial€court€accompaniedÐ \¬ Ðby€a€presumption€of€the€correctness€of€the€findings,€unless€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€isÐ H˜ Ðotherwise.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(2).€€This€standard€requires€this€Panel€to€conduct€anÐ 4„ Ðindependent€examination€of€the€record€to€determine€where€the€preponderance€lies.€€òòStory€v.€Legion,Ð  p ÐIns.€Co.,€óó3€S.W.3d€450,€451€(Tenn.€Sp.€Workers€Comp.€1999);€òòÔ_ÔGallowayÔ_Ô€v.€Memphis€Drum€Service,Ð  \ Ðóó822€S.W.2d€584,€586€(Tenn.€1991).€€Where€the€trial€court€has€seen€and€heard€the€witnesses,Ð øH Ðespecially€whereÔ#†X¼#XXX¥X´ #ÔÔ‡X¥XXXX¼#Ô€issues€of€credibility€are€involved,€a€reviewing€court€must€give€considerableÐ ä4 Ðdeference€to€the€trial€courtððs€findings.€€òòÔ_ÔFerrellÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔCignaÔ_Ô€Property€&€Ô_ÔCasÔ_Ô.€Ins.€Co.,€óó33€S.W.3d€731,Ð Ð  Ð734€(Tenn.€2000).€€No€such€deference€is€warranted€in€reviewing€documentary€proof.€€òòWells€v.Ð ¼  ÐTennessee€Bd.€of€Regents,€óó9€S.W.3d€779,€783„84€(Tenn.€1999).€€Although€the€medical€evidence€inÐ ¨ø Ðthis€record€is€not€contained€in€depositions,€this€Court€is€in€just€as€good€a€position€as€the€trial€courtÐ ”ä Ðto€judge€the€credibility€of€the€medical€experts.€€òòÔ_ÔKrickÔ_Ô€v.€City€of€Ô_ÔLawrenceburgÔ_Ô,€óó945€S.W.2d€709,€712Ð €Ð Ð(Tenn.€1997);€òòÔ_ÔElmoreÔ_Ô€v.€Travelers€Ins.€Co.,€óó824€S.W.2d€541,€544€(Tenn.€1992).€However,€the€extentÐ l¼ Ðof€vocational€disability€is€a€question€of€fact€to€be€determined€from€all€of€the€evidence,€including€layÐ X ¨ Ðand€expert€testimony,€if€any.€òò€Story,€óó3€S.W.3d€at€456;€òòÔ_ÔWorthingtonÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔModineÔ_Ô€Mfg.€Co.,€óó798€S.W.2dÐ D!” Ð232,€234€(Tenn.€1990).€Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àWhen€medical€testimony€may€differ,€it€is€within€the€discretion€of€the€trial€court€to€determineÐ $X" Ðwhich€expert€testimony€to€accept.€€òòÔ_ÔKellermanÔ_Ô€v.€Food€Lion,€Inc.,€óó929€S.W.2d€333,€335€(Tenn.€Sp.Ð ô$D # ÐWorkers€Comp.€1996);€òòJohnson€v.€Ô_ÔMidwescoÔ_Ô,€Inc.,€óó801€S.W.2d€804€(Tenn.€1990).€€The€medicalÐ à%0!$ Ðexpert€proof€in€this€record€consists€of€the€C„32€Standard€Form€Medical€Report€of€Dr.€Ô_ÔClaibourneÔ_ÔÐ Ì&"% ÐChristian,€the€reports€of€findings€of€Dr.€Joseph€Ô_ÔBoalsÔ_Ô,€III.€€The€trial€court€found€in€its€findings,€thatÐ ¸'#& ÐDr.€Christian€had€assessed€a€two€percent€(2%)€impairment€to€Plaintiffððs€right€and€left€upperÐ ¤(ô#' Ðextremities,€although€Dr.€Ô_ÔBoalsÔ_Ô€believed€Plaintiff€incurred€an€impairment€of€ten€percent€(10%)€toÐ )à$( Ðeach€upper€extremity.€€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* ÐÔ_Ôà  àThe€extent€of€an€injured€workerððs€disability€is€an€issue€of€fact.€€òòÔ_ÔJaskeÔ_Ô€v.€Murray€Ohio€Mfg.Ð ° ÐCo.,€Inc.,€óó750€S.W.2d€150,€151€(Tenn.€1988).€€Likewise,€in€assessing€the€extent€of€an€employeeððsÐ œì Ðvocational€disability,€the€trial€court€may€consider€the€employeeððs€skills€and€training,€education,€age,Ð ˆØ Ðlocal€job€opportunities,€anatomical€impairment€rating,€and€the€employeeððs€capacity€to€work€at€theÐ tÄ Ðkinds€of€employment€available€in€the€employeeððs€disabled€condition.€€The€employeeððs€ownÐ `° Ðassessment€of€his€or€her€physical€condition€cannot€be€disregarded.€€The€trial€court€is€not€bound€toÐ L œ Ðaccept€physiciansðð€opinions€regarding€the€extent€of€Plaintiffððs€disability,€but€should€consider€all€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðevidence,€both€expert€and€lay€testimony,€to€decide€the€extent€of€an€employeeððs€disability.€€òòWalkerÐ $ t Ðv.€Saturn€Corp.óó,€986€S.W.2d€204,€208€(Tenn.€1998).€Ð  ` ÐÌà  àIn€reviewing€the€trial€courtððs€decision,€the€trial€court€commented€on€Plaintiff€being€a€brightÐ è 8  Ðand€articulate€person,€with€a€great€deal€of€candor€and€credibility.€€The€trial€evidence€finds€PlaintiffÐ Ô$  Ðis€a€good€employee,€which€was€corroborated€by€other€testimony.€€Likewise,€the€trial€courtÐ À  Ðcommented€on€Plaintiffððs€long€employment€history,€and€has€developed€experience€from€supervisoryÐ ¬ü  Ðskills,€quality€control€and€manual€labor.€€Plaintiff€sustained€compensable€injuries€in€the€course€ofÐ ˜è  Ðemployment€which€worsened€to€the€requirement€of€surgery.€€It€is€obvious€the€trial€court€wasÐ „Ô  Ðimpressed€that€Plaintiff€elected€to€have€surgery€over€a€weekend€to€minimize€her€loss€of€work.€€TheÐ pÀ Ðtrial€court€found,€as€to€vocational€disability,€ð ðPlaintiffððs€disability€is€not€as€bad€as€some€carpal€tunnel,Ð \¬ Ðapparently€a€reasonable€good€result,€although€it€might€be€a€little€worse€now€than€it€was€immediatelyÐ H˜ Ðafter€the€surgery,€but€itððs€not€as€debilitating€as€some€cases€that€the€Courtððs€had€the€opportunity€toÐ 4„ Ðevaluate.ðð€€In€conclusion,€the€trial€court€found€that€the€evidence€supports€a€vocational€disability€ofÐ  p Ðthirty„five€(35%)€impairment€to€each€arm.€€From€our€independent€review€of€the€record,€andÐ  \ Ðconsideration€of€applicable€law,€we€cannot€say€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trialÐ øH Ðcourtððs€finding€as€to€the€extent€of€Plaintiffððs€permanent€disability.€Ð ä4 ÐÌÓ  Óò òCONCLUSIONÐ ¼  ÐÌÓ  Óà  àó óFrom€our€independent€review€of€the€entire€record,€we€find€the€evidence€does€notÐ ”ä Ðpreponderate€against€the€findings€of€the€trial€court€that€Plaintiff€suffered€a€thirty„five€percent€(35%)Ð €Ð Ðpermanent€partial€disability€to€each€arm.€€We€note,€however,€that€the€assessment€should€have€beenÐ l¼ Ðmade€under€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€50„6„207(3)(A)(ii)(w)€for€the€loss€of€two€arms€rather€thanÐ X ¨ Ðmaking€separate€awards€for€each€arm.€€Therefore,€we€modify€the€award€of€thirty„five€percent€(35%)Ð D!” Ðpermanent€partial€disability€to€both€arms€which€will€neither€increase€or€decrease€the€award€but€willÐ 0"€  Ðconform€the€trial€courtððs€judgment€to€the€statute.€€Costs€are€taxed€to€the€Ô_ÔAppellant.Ô_Ô€Ô#†X¼#XXX¥XB=#ÔÐ #l! ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð Ø&("% Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àL.€TERRY€Ô_ÔLAFFERTYÔ_Ô,€SENIOR€JUDGEÐ È'#& ÐÌÐ  ¨)ø$( Ðà@7 7 ìàÔ‡¼©¤»XX¼#ÔIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@==ìàSPECIAL€WORKERSðð€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELˆÐ È Ðà@''%ìàAT€JACKSONˆÐ à0 Ðà@ºº"ìàOctober€9,€€2001€ˆÐ øH ÐÌò òÓ  ÓDIANA€Ô_ÔNOLESÔ_Ô€v.€Ô_ÔAMERISTEELÔ_Ô€CORPORATIONó óÐ ( x ÐÓXÓÌà@j j ìàò òCircuit€Court€for€Carroll€CountyˆÐ X ¨ Ðà@ee"ìàNos.€€3979€&€3980ˆÐ p À ÐÌà@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<Ÿ` A߈Ð  ð  ÐÌà@ÐÐìàNo.€W2001„00406„Ô_ÔWCÔ_Ô„R3„CV€„€Filed€December€19,€2001ˆÐ Ç  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<ö` AßÐ ÷G Ðó óÌà@PP&ìàò òJUDGMENTó óˆÐ n ÐÌòòóóÌÔ‡ ¼û$»»¼©¤Ôà  àà ` àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€the€entire€record,€including€the€orderÐ f¶ Ðof€referral€to€the€Special€Workers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel,€and€the€Panel'sÐ xÈ ÐMemorandum€Opinion€setting€forth€its€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law,€whichÐ ŠÚ Ðare€incorporated€herein€by€reference;Ð œì ÐÌà  àà ` àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€Memorandum€Opinion€of€theÐ À ÐPanel€should€be€accepted€and€approved;€andÐ Ò" ÐÌà  àà ` àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Panel's€findings€of€fact€and€conclusionsÐ öF Ðof€law€are€adopted€and€affirmed,€and€the€decision€of€the€Panel€is€made€the€judgmentÐ !X Ðof€the€Court.Ð "j Ѐ€Ð ,#| Ðà  àà ` àCosts€on€appeal€are€taxed€to€the€Appellant,€Ô_ÔAmeristeelÔ_Ô€Corporation,€forÐ >$Ž Ðwhich€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ð P%   ÐÌà  àà ` àIT€IS€SO€ORDERED.Ð t'Ä"" ÐÌÔ#†¼©¤»» ¼û$«Z#ÔÔ‡¼©¤»»¼©¤ÔÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àPER€Ô_ÔCURIAMÔ_ÔÐ °*&% ÐÐ È+'& ÐÔ#†¼©¤»»¼©¤E_#ÔÔ#†X¼#X»¼©¤ôV#Ô