WPC: b@H iT_Zԭjıvrp;i=&LK? F;AeLkf QsEjoXWi 8M:mw)E TX} \Nsޒ6uT'Tx.B6ї]"pvIm)|X)zoMGxQ2X! B܌GiwfMmؚw#M:tGW|zHP8g9shVs[zzؤCTv?$oLܸiQaBg*Pߨyuǥˆlm? @Zrxe0 NN 1uEx 72z 0cNUN 0D_ zU@b//////////////////////////////////// 07777 B "" 0? D3 D- 0KCC AS 0 0DK A|-s (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular[-+003|x 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.wptU(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5HP LaserJet 4 Plus,,,,,,03#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)(;3$2#  0  .3  0  (hH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular(#$  0  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(9 Z(Times New Roman - -(|G2$ !.8,dd8         0  X[X d(|3$ !.8,dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$ !.8,dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8,dd8     _,8[XXdd8  ,@@7 7 INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE  SPECIALWORKERSCOMPENSATIONAPPEALSPANEL , @@ATJACKSON#,# X August16,2002Session 4 X[X, #,XX[#SANDRAKAYPOWERS,etal.v.AMERICANINTERSTATE <  INSURANCECOMPANY,etal.X[X,  T  @@ DirectAppealfromtheChanceryCourtforGibsonCounty \  @@Nos.H4259andH4372GeorgeR.Ellis,Chancellor L  @@*AV) ` dE<` A l  No.W200102751_WC_ԄR3CVMailedNovember5,2002;FiledDecember11,_2002_Ԁ k  #,XX[#X[X,AV) ` dE<` A ;      Thisworkers'compensationappealhasbeenreferredtotheSpecialWorkers'CompensationAppeals : PaneloftheSupremeCourtinaccordancewithTenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(3)forhearingand * reportingtotheSupremeCourtoffindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw.Inthisappeal,#,XX[#X[X,the  employer#,XX[#X[X,Ԁinsiststhecompetentevidencepreponderatesagainstthetrialcourt'sfindingthatthedeaths   oftwoemployeesoccurredinthecourseoftheiremploymentandinfavorofafindingthatthe  employeeshadmateriallydeviatedfromtheiremploymentatthetimeoftheirdeathsinavehicular  accident.Asdiscussedbelow,thepanelhasconcludedthejudgmentofthetrialcourtshouldbe  affirmed. z t   Tenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(2001Supp.)AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheChancery Z CourtAffirmed  J     JoeC.Loser,Jr.,Sp.J.#,X[L#X[X.,,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichJaniceM.Holder,J.,andW. *!z Michael_Maloan_,Sp.J.,joined. "j  StephenCraigKennedy,_Selmer_,Tennessee,fortheappellants,_Staton_'sHomeFurnishingsand #J" AmericanInterstateInsuranceCompany $: # ArtD.Wells,Jackson,Tennessee,fortheappellee,SandraKayPowers,asguardianandnextfriend &"% ofJessica_Witherspoon_,BillyJoe_Witherspoon_ԀandCody_Witherspoon_,minorchildrenofDavid ' #& _Witherspoon_,deceased (#' _Gayden_ԀDrew,Jackson,Tennessee,fortheappellee,Robbie_McEwen_,administratoroftheEstate *%) ofTimothy_Gallimore_,deceased z+&* !   MEMORANDUMOPINION #,XX[i #X[X, Z-(, Ї  #,XX[&#X[X,  Bytheseconsolidatedcivilactions,theclaimantssuedtorecoverworkers'compensation  benefits,asprovidedbytheWorkersCompensationAct,Tenn.CodeAnn.506101etseq,for  theaccidentaldeathsofDavid_Witherspoon_ԀandCharlesTimothy_Gallimore_ԀonJuly29,1999.The  employer,_Staton_'sHomeFurnishings,anditsinsurer,AmericanInterstateInsuranceCompany,  deniedliability.Afteratrialonthemerits,thetrialcourtawardeddeathbenefitstotheestateof p _Gallimore_Ԁanddependents'benefitstothechildrenof_Witherspoon_.Theemployeranditsinsurer `  haveappealed. P     Xh XXX[ForinjuriesoccurringonorafterJuly1,1985,appellatereviewisdenovoupontherecord 0  ofthetrialcourt,accompaniedbyapresumptionofcorrectnessofthefindingsoffact,unlessthe  l  preponderanceoftheevidenceisotherwise.#X[X X XhE#Tenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(2)(2001Supp.). Xh XXX[ԀThe X  reviewingcourtisrequiredtoconductanindependentexaminationoftherecordtodeterminewhere X  thepreponderanceoftheevidencelies.#X[X X Xh# Xh XXX[Ԁ_Wingert_Ԁv.GovernmentofSumnerCounty,908S.W.2d921, D  922(Tenn.1995).#X[X X Xh# Xh XXX[Thestandardgoverningappellatereviewoffindingsoffactbyatrialcourt 0  requirestheSpecialWorkersCompensationAppealsPaneltoexamineindepthatrialcourts   factualfindingsandconclusions.#X[X X Xh# Xh XXX[Ԁ_GAF_ԀBldg.Materialsv.George,47S.W.3d430,432(Tenn.2001).  #X[X X Xh# Xh XXX[Wherethetrialjudgehasseenandheardthewitnesses,especiallyifissuesofcredibilityandweight  tobegivenoraltestimonyareinvolved,considerabledeferencemustbeaccordedthose  circumstancesonreview,becauseitisthetrialcourtwhichhadtheopportunitytoobservethe | witnessesdemeanorandtoheartheincourttestimony.#X[X X Xh# Xh XXX[Longv.TriConInd.,Ltd.,996S.W.2d h 173,178(Tenn.1999).#X[X X Xhf# Xh XXX[ԀThetrialcourtsfindingswithrespecttocredibilityandweightofthe T evidencemaygenerallybeinferredfromthemannerinwhichthecourtresolvesconflictsinthe @ testimonyanddecidesthecase.#X[X X Xh# Xh XXX[_Tobitt_Ԁv.Bridgestone/Firestone,Inc.,59S.W.3d57,61(Tenn. ,| 2001).#X[X X Xh8# h   _Gallimore_Ԁand_Witherspoon_Ԁwereemployedby_Staton_sonthedateoftheirfatalaccident. D Theirdutiesincludeddeliveringandpickingupfurniture,usingacompanyvan,andcollectingpast 4 dueaccountsfromcustomerswhorentedfurniturefromtheemployer.Aroundnoononthedayof $ theaccident,theydeliveredapieceoffurnitureto_Witherspoon_smother.Sometimethereafter,they  deliveredatabletoMarkRussellshouseinDresden.AfterleavingtheRussellhouseinthe  companyvan,theywereinvolvedinthefatalaccident.Thereisafactualdisputeastowhetherthe   employeeshadpermissiontodeliverthetable,whichdidnotbelongtotheemployerbuthadbeen ! abandonedandlefttherebyaformertenant.Thetrialcourtresolvedconflictingtestimonyonthe "  issueinfavoroftheappellees.Inanyevent,theappellantscontendbenefitsshouldbedenied t#! becausetheemployeesdeviatedfromtheirusualrouteinordertodeliverthetabletoRussell. d$"    Xh XXX[UndertheTennesseeWorkersCompensationLaw,injuriesbyaccidentarisingoutofand D&!$ inthecourseofemploymentwhichcauseeitherdisablementordeathoftheemployee,#X[X X XhL"#Tenn.Code 0'"% Ann.506103(a) Xh XXX[,andoccupationaldiseasesarisingoutofandinthecourseofemploymentwhich 0(#& causeeitherdisablementordeathoftheemployeearecompensable.#X[X X Xh## Xh XXX[Tenn.CodeAnn.506 0)$' 102(a)(12).#X[X X Xhq$#Ԁ Xh XXX[Anaccidentalinjuryarisesoutofonesemploymentwhenthereisapparenttothe *l%( rationalmind,uponconsiderationofallthecircumstances,acausalconnectionbetweenthe +l&) conditionsunderwhichtheworkisrequiredtobeperformedandtheresultinginjury,#X[X X Xh$#_GAF_ԀBldg. ,X'* Materialsv.George,47S.W.3d430,432(Tenn.2001) Xh XXX[,andoccursinthecourseofones  employmentifitoccurswhileanemployeeisperformingadutyhewasemployedtodo.#X[X X Xh&# Xh XXX[ԀFinkv.  _Caudle_,856S.W.2d952,958(Tenn.1993).#X[X X Xh'#    TheappellantsfirstcontendthetrialcourterredinallowingDavid_Witherspoon_smotherto x testifythatDavidhadtoldherearlierinthedaythathehadpermissiontotakethetabletoMark h  Russellshome.Weagreethatthestatementshouldhavebeenexcludedasinadmissiblehearsay. X  However,therewasothercredibleevidenceonwhichthetrialcourtcouldhavefoundthesamefact. H  SandraKayPowerstestifiedthatLeeBlackwell,_Staton_sdistrictmanager,toldherhehadinstructed 8  _Witherspoon_Ԁand_Gallimore_ԀtotakethetabletoRussellshouse;andMargueriteFraziertestifiedthat ( x  Cindy_Uselton_,_Staton_sstoremanager,toldhershehadinstructed_Witherspoon_Ԁand_Gallimore_Ԁto h  dothesamething. X    Wearenotatlibertytosetasideafinaljudgmentfromwhichreliefisavailableandotherwise 8  appropriateunless,fromaconsiderationofthewholerecord,anerrorinvolvingasubstantialright (  moreprobablythannotaffectedthejudgmentorwouldresultinprejudicetothejudicialsystem.  TRAP36(b).Fromourindependentexaminationofthewholerecord,wearepersuadedtheerror  washarmlessinlightofthatrule.    TheappellantsnextcontendthetrialcourterredinexcludingCindy_Uselton_sanswersto  questionsastowhatsheknewandwhenandhowsheknewit.Sincenoofferofproofwasmade, x wedonothavethebenefitofknowingwhatheranswerswouldhavebeen.Theevidenceprobably h shouldhavebeenallowedbutwearenotpersuadedheranswerswouldhaveaffectedthejudgment X orresultedinprejudicetothejudicialsystem. H   TheappellantsnextcontendthetrialcourterredinfindingthatthetabledeliveredtoRussell (x wasownedbytheemployer.Thetablehadbeenleftin_Staton_swarehouseorshowroombya h previoustenantandthemanagerswanteditremoved.Regardlessoftheownership,thetablewas X removedbythedecedentstoaccommodatetheemployer.Thefindingofownershipwasnot H essentialtotheoutcomeofthecaseandthefinding,iferror,washarmless. 8   Theappellantsfinallycontendthetrialcourterredinfindingthattheaccidentoccurredin ! thecourseofthedeceasedemployeesemploymentbecausethechancellorstatedinhisruling, The "  courtfindsthatthedefensehasfailedtorebutthepresumptionsof5510311and5510312and, #! therefore,findsthattheaccidentoccurredwhileTim_Gallimore_ԀandDavid_Witherspoon_Ԁwereinthe $" courseofemploymentundertheworkmenscomplawsoftheStateofTennessee.Tenn.Code % # Ann.5510311and312createa_rebuttable_Ԁpresumptionbywhichthenegligenceofthedriver x&!$ ofamotorvehiclemaybeimputedtothevehiclesowner.Thesectionshavenoapplicationin h'"% workerscompensationcases.Weagreewiththeappellantthatthetrialcourtsapplicationofthe X(#& statutestothiscasewaserror.However,thepreponderanceoftheproofisthatthemainpurposeof H)$' theemployeestripwastocarryouttheemployersbusiness,eitherthecollectionofpastdue 8*%( accountsorremovalthetablefromthestore,andthattheaccidentoccurredduringadeviationfrom (+x&) theusualcourseoftravel. ,h'* Ї   Xh XXX[Aninjurywhichoccurswhileanemployeeisengagedinatripmadenecessarybythe  requirementsofhisemploymentiscompensableunlesstheinjuryoccurswhiletheemployeeis  deviatingfromaroutemandatedbyhisemployerandwhichmateriallyincreasestheriskofinjury.  #X[X X Xhu9#Watsonv.U.S.FireIns.Co.,577S.W.2d668,669(Tenn.1979). Xh XXX[ԀGenerally,adetourordeviation t whichdoesnotcauseorcontributetoanemployeesdeathorinjuryisofnoconsequence.#X[X X XhN;#ԀDailey t v._Russann_ԀLumberCo.,Inc.,590S.W.2d933,935(Tenn.1979).Thus,thedeterminativefactual t  issueinthecaseiswhetherthedeviationmateriallyincreasedtheriskofinjuryorcausedor d  contributedtothedeathsofMr._Gallimore_ԀandMr._Witherspoon_.Theonlyevidenceonthatpoint T  isthattheaccidentoccurredduringthedeviation. D    Fromourindependentexaminationoftherecordinthiscase,wearenotpersuadedthatthe $t  detourordeviationofthedeceasedemployeesmateriallyincreasedtheriskofinjuryorcausedor d  contributedtotheirdeaths.Itisnotenoughtosaytheaccidentoccurredduringthedeviation.For T  thatreason,thejudgmentisaffirmed.Costsonappealaretaxedtotheappellants. D     `     h     ___________________________________     `     h     JOEC.LOSER,JR.     @7 7 ,XX[INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE  @==SPECIALWORKERSCOMPENSATIONAPPEALSPANEL  @''%ATJACKSON 0 @"August16,2002 H    SANDRAKAYPOWERS,etal.v.AMERICANINTERSTATE ( x INSURANCECOMPANY,etal.  @  nB@  ChanceryCourtforGibsonCounty p  @ No.H4259andH4372   @*AV) ` dE<` A߈   @No.W200102751_WC_ԄR3CVFiledDecember11,2002 /  AV) ` dE<` A _  @PP& JUDGMENT  6  ,   ` ThiscaseisbeforetheCourtupontheentirerecord,includingtheorder f ofreferraltotheSpecialWorkers'CompensationAppealsPanel,andthePanel's x MemorandumOpinionsettingforthitsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw,which  areincorporatedhereinbyreference;     ` Whereupon,itappearstotheCourtthattheMemorandumOpinionofthe  Panelshouldbeacceptedandapproved;and "    ` Itis,therefore,orderedthatthePanel'sfindingsoffactandconclusions F oflawareadoptedandaffirmed,andthedecisionofthePanelismadethejudgment !X oftheCourt. "j Ѐ ,#|    ` CostsonappealaretaxedtotheAppellants,_Staton_sHomeFurnishings >$ andAmericanInterstateInsuranceCompany,forwhichexecutionmayissueif P%  necessary. b&!!    ` ITISSOORDERED. (## #, E#,,   `     h     PER_CURIAM_ *%% #,,I##X[X,TA#