ÿWPCy ·U: %L R n­b 04 C w@C 4ƒ T— 0Pë L; L‡ 0JÓ 0T 0^q 0hÏ 0r7 0|© 0†% 0« 1u; 0d° AQÆe 0P+ 0@{ 0D»U6ÿ D/5 Bd B D3žB)ÑDCú AM=U*Š´f¼+"v~MvÓË Až 0\<þ6X9`("Courier 10cpiX3|x-«<þ6X9`("Courier 10cpiXÂxþ6X@É“8õ X@( ¤U$¡¡Ó  Ó $V% î&'D(D)*E+,D-DÏeH#(c:\office\wpwin\template\legal\11deny.wpt((3Þ¸$©©Ý ƒ¤U!ÝÓ  ÓÝ  ÝC:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPTC:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT2 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!"#$&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5((3Þ¸$¢¢Ý ƒ¤U!ÝÓ  ÓÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó< Œ 9p`(Courier New(('÷ÿ dxd düÿP Pd'''''ÿÿdxd% Line 7 d****7Border 1dd!#+Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial þÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€%ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€-ÔÔ€-ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€-XÔÌÌDecember€16,€1997ÌÌCecil€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€-XÔÌÌDecember€16,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ion-F Geneva ÒÒ  ion-F Geneva Ò#yúÿ  <<= 8ÀÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ(43Añ$««Ý ƒ¤U!ÝÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ d ÔÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€%ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ Ð ÒÙ€!ÙÑ\R AØ'\ÑßR€,.+A1-j|` ç `€€@ÿRßÞ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àSPECIAL€WORKERS'€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELÌÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌÌÌÌWALLACE€EARL€PALMORE€€€€€€€€€€€)Ì€€€€€€€€Plaintiff/Appellee€€€€€)€€No.€01S01„9610„CV„00204€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ï)€€(No.€13668€below)Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìv.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€)€€LAWRENCE€COUNTY€CIRCUIT€COURT€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ï)€€€ÌFRITO„LAY,€INC.€and€€€€€€€€€€€€)€€HON.€JAMES€L.€WEATHERFORD,ÌSECOND€INJURY€FUND€€€€€€€€€€€€€)€€Judge€Ì€€€€€€€€Defendants/Appellants€€)€€Ìòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óó)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTSóó:€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€òòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌBRYAN€ESSARY€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€BEN€BOSTON€€€€€€€€€€€ÌSHIRLEY€A.€IRWIN€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€BOSTON,€BATES,€HOLT€€€€€€€€ÏGIDEON€&€WISEMAN€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€&€SOCKWELL€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÏNationsBank€Plaza,€Suite€1900€€€€€€€€P.O.€Box€357ÌNashville,€TN€37219„1782€€€€€€€€€€€€€Lawrenceburg,€TN€38464ÌÌòòSECOND€INJURY€FUNDÌÌóóCHARLES€W.€BURSONÌAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌSANDRA€E.€KEITHÌAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌCordell€Hull€Bldg.,€Second€FloorÌ426€5th€Ave.€NorthÌNashville,€TN€37243Ì€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àòòMEMORANDUM€OPINIONóóÌÌÌÌÌà@ àMEMBERS€OF€PANEL:ÌÌà@ àLYLE€REID,€ASSOCIATE€JUSTICE,€SUPREME€COURTÌ€€€à@ à€€€€WILLIAM€H.€INMAN,€SENIOR€JUDGE€€€€€€€Ìà@ àWILLIAM€S.€RUSSELL,€RETIRED€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌMODIFIED€AND€REMANDED€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€RUSSELL,€SP.€J.ÌÌÌÓÓÑ7€"&XXdÈXXdÈ7Ñà àThis€workers'€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€theÏSpecial€Workers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€CourtÏpursuant€to€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€Section€50„6„225€(e)(3)€forÏhearing€and€reporting€of€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.ÌÌà àWallace€Earl€Palmore€was€working€for€Frito„Lay,ÏIncorporated,€on€October€2,€1992,€at€a€labor€intensive€job€ofÏshoveling€peanut€butter€and€cheese€filling€into€a€snack€sandwichÏmaking€machine.€€He€had€been€working€twelve€hour€shifts€at€thisÏparticularly€physically€demanding€job€for€more€than€a€year.€€Mr.ÏPalmore€had€a€congenital€back€spondylolysis€withÏspondylolisthesis€and€degenerative€disc€disease.€€On€said€dateÏhis€back€pain€became€so€intense€that€he€could€no€longer€work€forÏFrito„Lay.à@ àÌà àÌà àMr.€Palmore€has€a€lifelong€history€of€back€problems,Íbeginning€at€the€age€of€13.€€In€1979,€as€a€result€of€aggravationÏof€his€condition€at€work€for€Frito„Lay€he€was€hospitalized€forÏacute€back€pain.€€X„rays€showed€spondylolysis€at€L5,€and€he€wasÏoff€work€for€two€weeks€before€returning€to€light€duty.€€In€1981Ïhis€back€popped€while€working€for€Frito„Lay€and€he€was€again€offÏwork€for€two€weeks€or€more.€€In€both€instances€he€receivedÏworkers'€compensation,€but€nothing€for€permanent€impairment.€€AtÏthe€time€of€the€episode€which€disabled€him€in€1992€his€employerÏknew€of€his€historic€back€problem.ÌÌà àNot€having€returned€to€work€after€the€October€2,€1992,Ïincident,€Palmore€brought€suit€against€Frito„Lay,€Inc.€on€AugustÏ23,€1993.€€In€said€suit€his€complaint€specifically€asked€for,Ïòòinteróó€òòaliaóó,€"permanent€total€disability€benefits";€but,€althoughÏthe€plaintiff€obviously€knew€at€that€time€of€his€pre„existingÏimpairment,€as€did€his€employer,€he€did€not€sue€the€Second€InjuryÏFund.€€Later,€on€June€28,€1994,€the€counsel€for€the€employee€andÏthe€employer€entered€an€"agreed"€order€joining€the€Second€InjuryÏFund€as€a€party€defendant.€€On€August€1,€1994,€an€"AmendedÏComplaint"€was€filed€which€included€the€employee's€claim€againstÏthe€Second€Injury€Fund.€€Said€defendant€Second€Injury€Fund€filedÏan€Answer€on€August€23,€1994,€denied€that€it€was€liable,€and€alsoÏdefended€upon€the€one€year€statute€of€limitations.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€found€the€employee€to€be€permanently€andÏtotally€disabled,€held€the€employer€liable€for€75%€of€thisÍdisability€and€the€Second€Injury€Fund€liable€for€25%.€€WithoutÏcomment,€the€trial€court€ruled€the€statute€of€limitations€defenseÏof€the€Second€Injury€Fund€"not€well€taken"€and€overruled€it.€€TheÏcourt€ruled€that€Mr.€Palmore€was€temporarily€totally€disabledÏfrom€October€2,€1992,€until€March€1,€1995;€that€his€compensationÏrate€was€$318.24€per€week;€that€the€total€compensation€forÏpermanent€total€disability€was€400€weeks;€and€that€Frito„LayÏshould€pay€$95,472.00€in€a€lump€sum€(75%€of€400€weeks)€and€thatÏthe€Second€Injury€Fund€should€pay€$31,824.00€(25%€of€400€weeks)Ïless€whatever€Frito„Lay€paid€for€temporary€total€benefits.€ÏFrito„Lay€was€to€be€credited€with€any€payment€for€temporary€totalÏin€excess€of€said€$31,824.00.€€Although€not€calculated€in€theÏjudgment,€it€appears€that€$40,028.94€was€paid€in€temporary€totalÏdisability€benefits,€meaning€that€the€Second€Injury€Fund€wouldÏpay€nothing.ÌÌà@ àòòSTANDARD€OF€REVIEWÌà àóóThis€court€reviews€the€findings€of€fact€by€the€trial€courtÏòòdeóóÌòònovoóó€upon€the€record€of€the€trial€court,€accompanied€by€aÏpresumption€of€the€correctness€of€the€finding€unless€theÏpreponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.€€Tennessee€CodeÏAnnotated€Section€50„6„225€(e)(2).ÌòòÌóóà@ àòòISSUESÌà àóóFrito„Lay,€Inc.€complains€of€the€75%„25%€allocation€ofÍresponsibility;€says€that€the€award€of€temporary€total€disabilityÏbenefits€in€a€permanent€total€disability€case€is€contrary€to€theÏintent€of€the€Workers'€Compensation€Act;€and€complains€thatÏtemporary€total€disability€benefits,€if€allowable,€should€haveÏbeen€terminated€as€of€December€2,€1993,€not€March€1,€1995.ÌÌà àThe€Second€Injury€Fund€complains:€€(1)€that€the€statute€ofÏlimitations€had€run€as€to€it;€(2)€that€in€this€case€it€had€noÏliability€under€T.C.A.€Sec.€50„6„242;€(3)€and€that€the€trialÏcourt€erred€in€awarding€the€employee€his€compensation€in€a€lumpÏsum.ÌÌà@ àòòSTATUTE€OF€LIMITATIONSÌà àóóThis€case€is€changed€drastically€by€our€conclusion€that€theÏone€year€statute€of€limitations€barred€the€action€against€theÏSecond€Injury€Fund.ÌÌà àThe€facts€in€this€case€are€remarkably€like€those€in€the€caseÏof€òòPearson€v.€Day€International€Inc.óó,€òò€€€€€€óó€S.W.€2d€òò€€€€€€Ïóó(Tenn.€1996)€[1996,€WL€385602].€€Ours€is€also€a€T.C.A.€Sec.€50„6„208€(a)€case.€€Mr.€Palmore's€right€to€recover€against€the€SecondÏInjury€Fund€was€not€dependent€on€the€outcome€of€prior€litigationÏregarding€his€pre„existing€disability.€€His€pre„existingÏdisability€was€largely€congenital.€€The€extent€of€his€priorÏdisability€was€ascertainable.€€He€was€treated€by€the€sameÏphysician€for€his€prior€flare„ups€and€the€disabling€episode.€ÍThat€physician€ultimately€gave€impairment€ratings€for€both€timeÏframes.€€Mr.€Palmore€alleged€in€his€original€complaint€that€heÏmight€be€permanently€and€totally€disabled€as€a€result€of€theÏOctober€2,€1992,€work€related€episode.€€As€Justice€Holder€wroteÏfor€the€court€in€òòPearsonóó,€this€case€is€more€squarely€aligned€withÏthe€reasoning€in€òòTravelers€Insurance€Company€V.€Austinóó,€521€S.W.Ï2d€738€(Tenn.€1975),€wherein€it€was€held€that€Tennessee€CodeÏAnnotated€Section€50„6„203€requires€suit€to€be€brought€within€oneÏ(1)€year€after€the€injury.€€An€exception€could€arise€if€theÏemployer€has€made€voluntary€payment€of€compensation€benefitsÏwithin€that€year.€€This€record€shows€no€such€payments€prior€to€anÏorder€to€pay€temporary€total€benefits€entered€on€December€29,Ï1994,€more€than€two€years€after€the€injury.€€The€dates€upon€whichÏmedical€benefits€were€first€paid€are€not€shown.Ìà àWe€hold,€therefore,€that€the€statute€of€limitations€defenseÏof€the€Second€Injury€Fund€is€good.ÌÌà àA€second€reason€for€the€dismissal€of€the€case€as€to€theÏSecond€Injury€Fund€exists.€€That€reason€is€that€the€evidenceÏpreponderates€against€the€finding€that€Mr.€Palmore€is€totally€andÏpermanently€disabled€as€defined€in€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÏSection€50„6„207€(4)(B):€òòÌÓÓóóà8 àà8 àWhen€an€injury€not€otherwise€specificallyÏprovided€for€in€this€chapter,€as€amended,Ïtotally€incapacitates€the€employee€fromÏworking€at€an€occupation€which€brings€suchÏemployee€an€income,€such€employee€shall€beÏconsidered€"totally€disabled",€and€for€suchÏdisability€compensation€shall€be€paid€asÍprovided€in€subdivision€(4)€(A);€*€*€*ÌÌÓÓÌà àThe€trial€judge€was€undoubtedly€influenced€to€hold€that€thisÏemployee€was€permanently€totally€disabled€because€on€August€24,Ï1995,€counsel€for€the€employer€wrote€the€attorney€for€theÏemployee€and€offered€to€stipulate€that€Mr.€Palmore€should€beÏfound€to€have€become€permanently€and€totally€disabled€as€thatÏterm€is€used€in€the€Workers'€Compensation€Act,€but€that€his€awardÏbe€limited€to€a€total€of€400€weeks€of€compensation€benefits.€ÏCounsel€for€the€employee€responded€by€letter€on€August€29,€1995Ïand€agreed€to€the€stipulation.€€Although€the€Second€Injury€FundÏwas€in€the€case€and€represented€by€counsel,€that€attorney€was€notÏprivy€to€the€stipulation€correspondence.€€This€stipulation€isÏtherefore€not€binding.€€It€is€obvious€that€both€the€employer€andÏthe€employee€were€advantaged€by€the€stipulation,€which€ipso€factoÏmade€the€Second€Injury€Fund€a€payment€participant€in€some€amount.€ÏIt€is€noteworthy€also€that€the€400€week€cap€is€inappropriate€in€aÏpermanent€total€disability€case.€€òòSeeóó€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÏSection€50„6„207€(4)(A).ÌÌà àWe€have€examined€the€evidence€as€to€the€extent€of€Mr.ÏPalmore's€disability.€€Two€physicians€testified€by€deposition.€ÏDr.€Stanley€Gilbert€Hopp,€and€orthopaedic€surgeon,€testified€thatÏMr.€Palmore€told€him€that€he€had€a€long€history€of€back€problems,Ïstarting€at€age€13.€€As€a€teenager€he€was€treated€by€aÏchiropractor.€€In€1979€he€was€hospitalized€from€a€spondylolysisÍdefect€at€L„5.€€He€was€off€work€for€a€couple€of€weeks€andÏreturned€to€light€duty.€€In€1981€he€bent€over,€his€back€popped,Ïand€he€was€off€work€two€or€three€weeks.€€He€got€some€outpatientÏtreatment€and€did€fairly€well€until€October€5,€1992.€€He€had€beenÏworking€long€hours,€shoveling.€€He€suffered€increased€pain€in€hisÏback€and€left€leg,€without€specific€incident€or€injury.ÌÌà àDr.€Hopp's€examination€revealed€a€little€tenderness€in€theÏlow€back,€but€no€muscle€spasm.€€His€lumbar€motion€was€mild€toÏmoderately€restricted.€€Other€than€decreased€sensation€in€the€topÏof€the€left€foot€his€nerves€were€normal€in€both€legs.€€X„rays€ofÏthe€lumbar€spine€revealed€spondylolisthesis€at€L„5.€€There€wereÏdegenerative€changes€at€L„3,€4.€€His€CT€scan€showed€facetÏarthrosis€at€L„4,€5€and€S„1.€€There€was€no€disc€herniation€orÏstenosis.ÌÌà àDr.€Hopp€testified€that€Mr.€Palmore's€pain€was€primarilyÏfrom€degenerative€problems€in€the€low€back,€with€occasionalÏirritation€of€the€nerve€root,€with€a€superimposed€sprain€orÏstrain€injury.ÌÌà àDr.€Hopp€testified€that€he€did€not€think€that€it€would€be€inÏMr.€Palmore's€best€interest€to€bend€over€high€tubs€and€scoot€downÏor€shovel€heavy€peanut€butter.€€He€thought€that€would€strain€hisÏback;€and€if€they€didn't€have€anything€else€for€him€to€do€that€heÏwould€probably€need€to€change€his€job€or€even€seek€disability.€ÍBut€he€testified€that€he€thought€it€was€probably€better€"for€aÏperson€to€keep€working".€ÌÌà àDr.€Hopp€opined€that€this€employee€had€sustained€a€chronicÏstrain€of€his€back,€resulting€in€a€five€percent€permanent€partialÏimpairment€of€the€whole€person.€€He€set€out€permanentÏrestrictions€of€no€lifting€greater€that€30€pounds€maximum,€15Ïpounds€frequently.€€He€should€avoid€trunk€twisting,€butÏoccasional€bending€is€allowed.òòÌà àóóÌà àHis€treating€physician€was€Dr.€Norman€L.€Henderson,€M.D.€€HeÏtestified€that€prior€to€the€incident€in€issue€that€Mr.€PalmoreÏhad€a€12€to€13€percent€impairment€to€the€whole€body.€€HeÏtestified€that€the€incident€in€question€resulted€in€an€additionalÏ7€to€8€percent€permanent€aggravation€of€the€prior€impairment€Dr.ÏHenderson€testified€that€in€his€opinion€Mr.€Palmore€is€notÏ"medically€employable€at€all".ÌÌà àMr.€Palmore€owns€a€76€acre€farm.€€In€1995€his€tax€returnÏindicated€that€he€made€$3443.35€farming.€€The€testimony€of€Mr.Ïand€Mrs.€Palmore€was€that€he€did€only€light€work€in€looking€afterÏcattle€and€chickens.ÌÌà àMr.€Palmore€has€obtained€a€disability€pension€from€SocialÏSecurity,€but€the€record€does€not€reflect€the€basis€for€theÏruling.ÌÌà àBased€upon€Dr.€Hopp's€testimony,€and€the€admitted€farmingÏactivity,€this€employee€does€not€qualify€as€totally€disabled.ÌÌà@ àòòCONCLUSIONSóóÌà àBecause€of€the€Statute€of€Limitations€defense€and€ourÏjudgment€that€Mr.€Palmore€is€not€permanently€totally€disabled€weÏhold€that€the€suit€is€dismissed€as€to€the€Second€Injury€Fund;€andÏthe€employer's€complaint€directed€at€temporary€total€disabilityÏcompensation€being€ordered€paid€in€a€total€disability€case€isÏrendered€moot.€€We€reverse€the€trial€court€in€holding€that€theÏterminal€date€for€the€temporary€total€disability€payments€isÏMarch€1,€1995,€and€hold€the€date€to€be€December€2,€1993.€€We€setÏthe€permanent€partial€vocational€disability€to€the€body€as€aÏwhole€at€75€percent,€and€affirm€the€trial€judge's€order€of€lumpÏsum€payment.ÌÌà àWe€remand€the€case€to€the€trial€court€for€the€enforcement€ofÏthis€judgment,€as€modified.€€Costs€on€appeal€are€assessed€toÏFrito„Lay,€Incorporated.€Ìà àÌÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÓÓóó€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÏWILLIAM€S.€RUSSELL,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌóóLYLE€REID,€ASSOCIATE€JUSTICE€Ì€ÌÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌóóWILLIAM€H.€INMAN,€SENIOR€JUDGE€€€€Ì€ÌÑ€/ÑÇÒ € ÒÒ „ ÒÑ ` ÑßJ€,0;+'b|^¿` ç `€@ÿJßà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌWALLACE€EARL€PALMORE,à@ à)à àLAWRENCE€CIRCUITÌà@ à)à àNO.€13688Ìà àPLAINTIFF/APPELLEE,à@ à)Ìà@ à)à àHON.€JAMES€L.€WEATHERFORDÌv.à@ à)à àSENIOR€JUDGEÌà@ à)ÌFRITO„LAY,€INC.€AND€à@ à)ÌSECOND€INJURY€FUND,à@ à)à àS.CT.NO.€01S01„9610„CV„00204Ìà@ à)Ìà àDEFENDANTS/APPELLANTS.à@ à)à0 àMODIFIED€AND€REMANDED.ÌÌÌÌà@ àòòò òJUDGMENTó óóóÌÌÌÓÓà àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€motion€for€reviewÏpursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð50„6„225(e)(5)(B),€the€entireÏrecord,€including€the€order€of€referral€to€the€Special€Workers'ÏCompensation€appeals€Panel,€and€the€Panel's€Memorandum€OpinionÏsetting€forth€its€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law,Ïwhich€are€incorporated€herein€by€reference;Ìà àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€motion€forÏreview€is€not€well€taken€and€should€be€denied;€and€Ìà àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Panel's€findings€ofÏfact€and€conclusions€of€law€are€adopted€and€affirmed,€and€theÏdecision€of€the€Panel€is€made€the€judgment€of€the€Court.Ìà àCosts€will€be€paid€by€Frito„lay,€Incorporated,€for€whichÍexecution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ìà àIt€is€so€ordered€this€16th€day€of€December,€1997.ÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPER€CURIAMÑ ° ÑÒ ° ÒÒ ° ÒÓÓ