ÿWPCÏ 4# èUNó %A 0YGw@ 4àô {(  03 0DÐ AQ 0Je 0T¯ 0^ 0ha 0rÉ 0|; 0†· 0= 1uÍ 0dB B¦ ÆÃ 0u‰ 0@þ 0D> D/‚ B± D3Î U> B)? DCh AM« U*ø .".Pv~~vÓü˜HP LaserJet 4 PlusHPPCL5MS,ð,,,,,ð0nLHÎ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX(1ÞÙ$¡¡Ô€SðÝSXXÔÓþÓ ÐDÑÒEÓÔDÕÖEרDÙÓ€ÏeH#x3|xâ($¡¡(M(3<*$¤¤Ý ƒÞÙ!ÝÔ€S‚SXXÔÓþÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó!"#$&Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ dƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(M3çV$¢¢Ý ƒÞÙ!ÝÔ€S‚SXXÔÓþÓÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó(('÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd 'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d,,,,7Border 1dd!#-Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial $Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€+ÔÓþÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€/ÔÔ€/ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€/XÔÌÌDecember€16,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó $Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€+ÔÓþÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€/ÔÔ€/ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€/XÔÌÌDecember€16,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$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 ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€+ÔÓþÓÝ  Ýò òÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔT€ ÔÑ7€Ü¢XdðdÈ7ÑÙ€!ÙßR€.0-A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àSPECIAL€WORKERSðð€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌó óÌÌCRAIG€RING,à@ à)à àà àFRANKLIN€CIRCUITÌà@ à)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appelleeà@ à)à àà àNO.€œ01S01„9702„CV„00031›Ìà@ à)Ìv.à@ à)à àà àHON.€J.€CURTIS€SMITH,Ìà@ à)à àà àJUDGEÌCKR€INDUSTRIES,€INC.€and€THEà@ à)ÌYASUDA€FIRE€&€MARINE€INSURANCEà@ à)ÌCOMPANY€OF€AMERICA,à@ à)Ìà@ à)Ìà àDefendants/Appellantsà@ à)Ìà@ à)ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÒ€X€ÒòòFor€the€Appellantóós:ÌÌA.€Gregory€RamosÌJanice€CimbaloÌNORTH,€PURSELL€&€RAMOSÌNashville,€TennesseeÉòòFor€the€Appellee:óóÌÌFloyd€Don€DavisÌFLOYD€DON€DAVIS,€P.C.ÌWinchester,€TennesseeÉÒÒÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌà@ àò òMEMORANDUM€OPINIONÌÌÌÌó óà@ àMEMBERS€OF€PANELÌÌà@ àLYLE€REID,€ASSOCIATE€JUSTICE,€SUPREME€COURTÌà@ àWILLIAM€S.€RUSSELL,€RETIRED€JUDGEÌà@ àW.€MICHAEL€MALOAN,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌAFFIRMEDà àà àà àà àà àà àMALOAN,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÇÓ üÓœ›à àThis€Workersðð€Compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€Special€WorkersððÏCompensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€in€accordance€with€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÏðð50„6„225(e)(3)€for€hearing€and€reporting€to€the€Supreme€Court€of€findings€of€fact€andÏconclusions€of€law.Ìà àThe€defendants,€CKR€Industries,€Inc.€and€The€Yasuda€Fire€&€Marine€Insurance€CompanyÏof€America,€appeal€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€in€œfinding›€the€plaintiff,€Craig€Ring,€œsustained›€aÏcompensable€work„related€injury€and€œawarding›€permanent€partial€disability€of€twenty„five€percentÏ(25%)€to€the€left€arm.€€For€the€reasons€stated€in€this€opinion,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trialÏcourt.Ìà àThe€plaintiff,€Craig€Ring,€was€26€years€of€age€at€the€time€of€this€trial.€€He€has€a€GED,€noÏspecialized€job€training,€and€a€prior€history€of€factory€production€work.€€Plaintiff€worked€forÏdefendant,€CKR€Industries€for€4€years€prior€to€August€30,€1994,€when€he€reported€an€injury€to€hisÏleft€index€finger€and€arm.€€He€operated€a€press€or€machine€at€that€time€which€required€repetitiveÏmovement€of€both€arms.Ìà àDr.€Mary€Ellen€Clinton,€a€board€certified€neurologist,€examined€and€treated€plaintiff€œafter€heÏhad€been€seen›€and€referred€by€numerous€doctors.€€She€gave€various€possible€causes€of€plaintiffððsÏproblem,€but€stated€his€condition€was€not€work„related.Ìà àPlaintiff€was€seen€by€Dr.€Richard€Fishbein,€a€board€certified€orthopedic€surgeon,€for€theÏpurpose€of€an€independent€medical€evaluation.€€Dr.€Fishbein€was€of€the€opinion€the€plaintiffððsÏcondition€was€ulnar€neuropathy€caused€by€his€repetitive€work.€€He€assessed€a€permanent€partialÏimpairment€of€fifteen€percent€(15%)€to€the€left€upper€extremity€and€assigned€work€restrictions€of€noÏlifting€of€more€than€20€pounds€on€a€regular€basis€and€no€more€than€50€pounds€on€a€very€infrequentÏbasis.Ìà àPlaintiff€testified€he€really€did€not€know€how€or€when€he€hurt€his€finger€and€arm,€but€œthey›Ïfirst€œbecame€painful›€at€work€on€August€30,€1994.€€At€trial,€he€complained€of€constant€pain€in€hisÏleft€elbow€and€numbness€in€the€tip€of€his€left€index€finger.€€Because€of€his€work€restrictions,€heÍhas€been€transferred€to€a€lighter€job€at€less€pay.€€Plaintiff€has€taken€up€golf,€built€a€deck€on€hisÏhouse,€and€raced€four€wheelers€since€August,€1994.Ìà àAt€trial,€the€parties€stipulated€the€date€of€the€injury,€notice,€all€medical€bills€and€temporaryÏtotal€disability€payments€œhad›€been€paid,€and€the€appropriate€weekly€compensation€rate.€€The€issuesÏœpresented›€for€trial€were€causation€and€extent€of€disability.€€After€hearing€the€evidence,€the€trial€courtÏfound€the€injury€to€be€work„related€and€assessed€a€twenty„five€percent€(25%)€permanent€partialÏdisability€to€the€left€upper€extremity.Ìà àThe€scope€of€review€of€issues€of€fact€is€òòde€novoóó€upon€the€record€of€the€trial€court,Ïaccompanied€by€a€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€findings,€unless€the€preponderance€ofÏevidence€is€otherwise.€€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€50„6„225(e)(2).€€òòLollar€v.€Wal„Mart€Stores,ÏInc.óó,€767€S.W.2d€143€(Tenn.€1989).€€When€a€trial€court€has€seen€and€heard€witnesses,€especiallyÏwhere€issues€of€credibility€and€weight€of€oral€testimony€are€involved,€considerable€deference€mustÏbe€accorded€the€trial€courtððs€factual€findings.€€òòHumphrey€v.€David€Witherspoon,€Inc.óó,€734€S.W.2dÏ315€(Tenn.€1987).€€However,€where€the€issues€involve€expert€medical€testimony€which€isÏcontained€in€the€record€by€deposition,€as€it€is€in€this€case,€then€all€impressions€of€weight€andÏcredibility€must€be€drawn€from€the€contents€of€the€depositions,€and€the€reviewing€court€may€drawÏits€own€impression€as€to€weight€and€credibility€from€the€contents€of€the€depositions.€€òòOverman€v.ÏWilliams€Sonoma,€Inc.óó,€803€S.W.2d€672,€676„77€(Tenn.€1991).Ìà àThe€plaintiff€in€a€workerððs€compensation€case€has€the€burden€of€proving€every€element€ofÏhis€case€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence.€€òòElmore€v.€Travelerððs€Ins.€Co.óó,€824€S.W.2d€541,Ï543€(Tenn.€1992).€€An€accidental€injury€arises€out€of€oneððs€employment€when€there€is€apparent€toÏthe€rational€mind,€upon€a€consideration€of€all€the€circumstances,€a€causal€connection€between€theÏconditions€under€which€the€work€is€required€to€be€performed€and€the€resulting€injury,€and€occursÏin€the€course€of€oneððs€employment€if€it€occurs€when€an€employee€is€performing€a€duty€he€wasÏemployed€to€do.€€òòFink€v.€Caudleóó,€856€S.W.2d€952€(Tenn.€1993).€€As€to€causation,€our€SupremeÏCourt€stated€in€òòTindall€v.€Waring€Park€Assððnóó,€725€S.W.2d€935,€937€(Tenn.€1987)€as€follows:ÌÓþÓœ›à8 àThis€Court€has€consistently€held€that€causation€and€permanency€of€a€work„relatedÏinjury€must€be€shown€in€most€cases€by€expert€medical€evidence.€€Furthermore,€byÏð ðcausal€connectionðð€is€meant€not€proximate€cause€as€used€in€the€law€of€negligence,Ïbut€cause€in€the€sense€that€the€accident€had€its€origin€in€the€hazards€to€which€theÏemployment€exposed€the€employee€while€doing€his€work.€€Although€absoluteÏcertainty€is€not€required€for€proof€of€causation,€medical€proof€that€the€injury€wasÏcaused€in€the€course€of€the€employeeððs€work€must€not€be€speculative€or€so€uncertainÏregarding€the€cause€of€the€injury€that€attributing€it€to€the€plaintiffððs€employmentÏwould€be€an€arbitrary€determination€or€a€mere€possibility.€€If,€upon€undisputedÏproof,€it€is€conjectural€whether€disability€resulted€from€a€cause€operating€withinÏemployment,€there€can€be€no€award.€€If,€however,€equivocal€Çà8 àmedical€evidence€combined€with€other€evidence€supports€a€finding€of€causation,Ïsuch€an€inference€may€nevertheless€be€drawn€by€the€trial€court€under€the€case€law.ÌÌÓ üÓœ›à àAs€in€many€workerððs€compensation€cases,€there€is€a€conflict€of€medical€testimony€as€toÏcausation€and€degree€of€permanent€impairment€between€a€treating€and€an€evaluating€physician.€ÏWhile€a€treating€physicianððs€testimony€is€entitled€to€considerable€weight,€òòBlanche€Smith€v.€BruceÏHardwood€Floorsóó,€21€TAM€40„4,€No.€02501„9512„CV„00130€(Tenn.€1996),€no€rule€of€lawÏrequires€the€trial€court€to€accept€the€testimony€of€a€treating€physician€over€any€other€conflictingÏmedical€testimony.€€òòHayes€v.€School€Calendar€Co.óó,€22€TAM€36„7,€No.€03501„9609„CZ„00093Ï(Tenn.€1997).Ìà àThe€trial€court€stated€in€his€decision€from€the€bench,€ð ðI€believe€by€a€preponderance€of€theÏevidence€the€plaintiff€has€proved€his€case€that€this€is€a€work„related€injury.ðð€€After€a€thoroughÏreview€of€the€evidence€in€the€record,€we€cannot€say€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trialÏcourtððs€finding€the€plaintiff€sustained€a€compensable€work„related€injury.Ìà àThe€next€issue€on€appeal€is€the€trial€courtððs€award€of€twenty„five€percent€(25%)€permanentÏpartial€disability€to€the€left€arm.€€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð50„6„241(2)(1)€requires€the€trial€courtÏto€consider€all€pertinent€factors,€including€lay€and€expert€testimony,€employeeððs€age,€education,Ïskills€and€training,€local€job€opportunities,€and€capacity€to€work€at€types€of€employment€availableÏin€claimants€disabled€condition€in€determining€the€extent€of€an€injured€workerððs€permanentÏdisability.€€From€a€consideration€of€all€these€factors,€we€are€not€persuaded€the€evidenceÏpreponderates€against€the€trial€courtððs€award€of€twenty„five€percent€(25%)€to€the€left€arm.Ìà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€This€appeal€is€dismissed€at€defendantððs€cost.Ìà àÌÓþÓœ›à àà àà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________à àà àà àà àà àà àà àW.€Michael€Maloan,€Special€JudgeÌÌÌConcur:ÌÌÌÌ_______________________________________ÌLyle€Reid,€JusticeÌÌÌ______________________________________ÌWilliam€S.€Russell,€Senior€œJudgeÇÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÑ ` Ñà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌÓ  ÓAT€NASHVILLEÌÓ  ÓßJ€.1;+'b|` Å `€@ÿJßÌÌÌCRAIG€RING€€€€€€€€€€€€à àà àà à)€Franklin€Circuit€No.€9235Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPlaintiff/Appelleeà àà àà à)€Hon.€J.€Curtis€Smith,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)€JudgeÌv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)€Supreme€Court€No.ÌCKR€INDUSTRIES,€INC.,€and€€€€€€€€€€à à)€€€01„S„01„9702„CV„00031ÌTHE€YASUDA€FIRE€&€MARINEà àà à)ÌINSURANCE€COMPANY€OF€AMERICAà à)€AffirmedÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àDefendants/Appellantsà à€€€€€à à)Ìà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€€€ÌÌà@ àòòJUDGMENT€ORDERóóÌÓ€ÓÌà àà àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€motion€for€review€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€50„6„225(e)(5)(B),€the€entire€record,€including€the€order€of€referral€to€the€Special€Workers'ÏCompensation€Appeals€Panel,€and€the€Panel's€Memorandum€Opinion€setting€forth€its€findings€ofÏfact€and€conclusions€of€law,€which€are€incorporated€herein€by€reference;ÌÌà àà àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€motion€for€review€is€not€well„taken€andÏshould€be€denied;€andÌÌà àà àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Panel's€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law€areÏadopted€and€affirmed,€and€the€decision€of€the€Panel€is€made€the€judgment€of€the€Court.ÌÌà àà àCost€will€be€paid€by€defendant/appellant€and€surety,€for€which€execution€may€issueÏif€necessary.ÌÌÌà àà àIt€is€so€ordered€this€16th€day€of€December,€1997.ÌÌÌÓþÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPER€CURIAMÌÌReid,€J.,€not€participating›