ÿWPC? …# VUNa %¯ 0(µw@Ý4 1 @ ÆH Æ ÆÔ Æš 0J` 0Tª 0^þ 0h\ 0rÄ 0|6 0†² 08 1uÈ 0d=U>¡B)ßDC BK AMhU *µêß É D3Öv~ vÓ‡ 0@Z AOšÆé 0D¯ D/ó B"˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ 56E7P8P9Ó€EFVGîHÓ€Tj„"Ô`$3|xTLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d####7Border 1dd d€-$Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial àÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÔ€'ÔÔ€'ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€'XÔÌÌò òApril€17,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€'ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÔ€'ÔÔ€'ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€'XÔÌÌò òApril€17,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€'ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó%%%%'ÿÿdxdPtPtHHøHÿöÿòV,(ühhØ hd'0ÿÎÿºF ® Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  eskto Geneva ÒÒ  eskto Geneva Ò("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓ  ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€"¼Ô›à@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àSPECIAL€WORKERSðð€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELÌÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌà@ à(February€6,€1997€Session)ÌÌÌÓ ` Ü›XÓJAMES€RAY€SCOTT,à àà àà à)à àDYER€CHANCERYÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àœPlaintiff„Appellee,à àà àà à)›à àHon.€J.€Steven€Stafford,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àœJudge›Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌœVs›.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€œ02S01›„9608„CH„00073ÌÙ€€ÙœßL€&($;+'h|ÿ` Å `€€Lß›à àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌMA€HANNA€COMPANY,à àà à)Ì€€€€d/b/a€COLONIAL€RUBBERà àœà à)›Ì€€€€WORKS,€œINC.,›à àœand€RELIANCE›à à)Ìœ€€€€€INSURANCE€COMPANY,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)›à àÌà àœDefendants„Appellants.›à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌÌÌÌòòFor€œAppellantsóó:›à àà àà àà àà àòòFor€Appelleeóó:ÌÌMr.€Ralph€I.€œLawson›à àà àà àà àMr.€David€M.€œHardee›ÌœLawson€&€Lawsonà àà àà àà àHardee,€Martin€and€Jaynes,€P.A.›Ì306€Church€Ave.à àà àà àà àà à213€E.€LafayetteÌDyersburg,€Tennessee€œ38025„1207›à àà àJackson,€Tennessee€38301ÌÌÌÌÌà@ àòòM€E€M€O€R€A€N€D€U€M€€€€€O€P€I€N€I€O€NÌÌà@ àMembers€of€Panelóó:ÌÌà@ àLyle€Reid,€Associate€Justice,€Supreme€CourtÌà@ àJoe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€Special€JudgeÌà@ àLeonard€W.€Martin,€Special€JudgeÌÌÌÌœAFFIRMED€AS€MODIFIED›à àà àà àà àà àà à€€€€€€€€€€€€Martin,ÏJudgeÌÌÌÌÇÑ7€µSXXdìXXdì7ÑÌà@ àòòMEMORANDUM€OPINIONóóÌÌÌÌÓ€Óà àà àThis€workersðð€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€SpecialÏWorkersðð€Compensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€in€accordance€withÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€section€50„6„225(e)(3)€for€hearing€and€reporting€to€theÏSupreme€Court€of€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.€€In€this€appeal,€theÏemployer€questions€the€award€of€permanent€partial€disability€benefits€as€beingÏexcessive.€€As€discussed€below,€the€panel€has€concluded€the€judgment€should€beÏmodified.ÌÌà àà àThe€employee,€Scott,€is€forty„seven€(47)€years€old,€and€has€an€eighthÏ(8th)€grade€education.€€He€has€farmed€and€worked€at€a€cotton€gin.€€He€has€noÏspecialized€skills€or€training.€€He€has€an€I.Q.€of€sixty„five€(65)€and€a€severeÏspeech€impediment.€€He€worked€for€the€defendant€employer€for€twenty„two€(22)Ïyears.€€During€the€course€of€his€employment,€he€has€performed€various€jobs€andÏwas€operating€a€scrubber€at€the€time€of€his€injury.ÌÌà àà àThe€employee€was€injured€at€work€on€June€4,€1994,€when€he€wasÏgetting€off€of€the€scrubber€and€fell.€€He€testified€that€he€hurt€his€neck,€back,€andÏleft€shoulder.ÌHe€was€first€seen€by€Doctor€Michael€Heck,€who€prescribed€medication€andÏreturned€him€to€work€on€light€duty.€€He€was€then€seen€by€Doctor€Stewart,€whoÏreturned€him€to€regular€duty€with€the€defendant.ÌÌà àà àDoctor€Riley€Jones€treated€the€plaintiff€and€opined€that€he€had€a€œ10›Ïœper€cent›€œ(10%)€anatomical›€impairment€to€the€left€upper€extremity.€€Dr.€JonesÍgave€him€no€impairment€rating€for€his€back€and€sent€him€back€to€regular€duty.ÌÌà àà àDr.€Robert€Paul€Christopher€saw€the€plaintiff€on€July€24,€1995,€forÏan€independent€medical€evaluation.€€He€opined€that€the€plaintiff€had€a€œ10›€œper€centÏ(10%)€›€impairment€to€the€left€upper€extremity,€a€œ6›€œper€cent›€œ(6%)€impairment›€as€aÏresult€of€injury€to€the€cervical€spine,€translating€to€a€combined€rating€of€œ12›€œperÏcent›€œ(12%)€to›€the€body€as€a€whole.ÌÌà àà àThe€plaintiff€was€also€seen€by€Doctor€Robert€J.€Barnett€for€anÏindependent€medical€evaluation€on€February€24,€1995.€€Doctor€Barnett€rated€theÏshoulder€injury€at€œ10€per€cent€(10%),›€œ€the›€back€injury€at€œ10€per€cent€(10%),€›€andÏgave€the€plaintiff€a€combined€rating€of€œ15›€œper€cent›€œ(15%)€disability›€to€the€body€asÏa€whole.ÌÌà àà àMs.€Ellen€Ambuehl€testified€as€a€certified€vocational€rehabilitationÏcounselor.€€She€testified€that€the€plaintiffððs€educational€level€was€well€below€hisÌstated€eighth€(8th)€grade€education,€his€I.Q.€was€sixty„five€(65)€(first€percentile),Ïthat€he€had€a€low€average€range€for€dexterity,€a€severe€deficiency€in€fingerÏdexterity,€a€lifting€ability€between€fifteen€(15)€and€twenty„six€(26)€pounds,€andÏthat€he€had€a€severe€speech€impediment.€€She€rated€him€at€a€œ96›€œper€cent›€œ(96%)Ïoccupational›€loss.ÌÌà àà àThe€plaintiff€returned€to€duty€on€the€scrubber,€worked€forÏapproximately€two€(2)€weeks,€and€then€quit.€€He€contends€that€he€could€not€do€theÏjob.€€A€physical€therapist,€Eddie€Crocker,€who€treated€the€plaintiff,€testified€thatÏthe€last€time€he€saw€him€he€did€not€place€any€physical€limitations€on€his€ability.€ÏThe€physical€therapist€had€treated€the€plaintiff€for€some€twenty„eight€(28)Íscheduled€visits.€€The€plaintiffððs€supervisor,€Donald€Haley,€testified€that€theÏplaintiff€performed€his€work€right€up€until€the€time€he€quit,€and€that€he€neverÏmade€any€complaints.€€He€also€testified€that€the€employer€accommodated€peopleÏwho€had€been€injured,€or€who€had€some€physical€inability€to€work.€€TheÏemployeeððs€safety€coordinator,€Larry€Poteet,€testified€that€they€hadÏaccommodated€a€lady€who€had€a€work€related€accident€consistent€with€a€shoulderÏinjury,€that€they€had€an€operator€with€only€one€œ(1)€arm,›€and€a€man€who€œhad€had›Ïheart€surgery.€€He€knew€that€the€plaintiff€had€returned€to€regular€duty€and€thenÏjust€quit.€€He€stated€that€the€plaintiff€took€his€vacation€time€and€then€he€called€inÏsick€several€times.€€He€also€stated€that€the€plaintiff€called€in€several€times€with€carÏtrouble€or€unexcused€absences€and€that€they€couldnððt€get€him€to€come€back€toÏwork.€€He€also€testified€that€the€plaintiff€could€have€worked€right€on€and€could€beÏworking€today.€€It€was€also€testified€that€the€acting€director€called€the€plaintiff€toÏget€him€to€come€down€so€they€could€see€what€his€problem€was€and€that€he€wouldÏnot€come€down€to€talk€to€them.€€He€just€said€he€wasnððt€coming.€€He€never€said€heÏwasnððt€able€to€come€back,€he€said€his€car€was€broke€down.€€When€asked€if€theÏplaintiff€ever€told€him€that€he€wasnððt€able€to€do€the€job,€his€answer€was,€ð ðNo,€heÏjust€told€us€he€was€not€œcoming.ððÌÌà àà àThe€panel€finds€that€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€is€that€theÏplaintiff€could€have€continued€to€perform€his€job€with€the€accommodations€whichÏthe€employer€was€willing€to€make.›ÌÌà àà àThe€trial€court€awarded€permanent€partial€disability€benefits€basedÏon€œ45›€œper€cent›€œ(45%)€vocational›€impairment€to€the€body€as€a€whole.€€AppellateÏreview€is€ò òde€novoó ó€upon€the€record€of€the€trial€court,€accompanied€by€aÏpresumption€of€correctness€of€the€findings€of€the€trial€court,€unless€theÍpreponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.€€Tenn.€Code.€Ann.€section€50„6„225(e)(2).ÌÌà àà àThere€is€no€dispute€about€causation,€and€little€difference€as€toÏanatomical€œimpairment,›€with€one€doctor€rating€the€plaintiff€at€œ12›€œper€cent›€œ(12%)Ïpermanent›€partial€œimpairment›€to€the€body€as€a€whole,€and€another€doctor€ratingÏhim€at€œ15›€œper€cent€(15%).€€›€€What€is€in€dispute€is€whether€or€not€the€plaintiffÏcould€have€continued€to€work€and€perform€his€job.€€The€trial€court€made€noÏspecific€finding€in€this€regard.€€œÌà àà àIn€cases€where€an€injured€employee€is€eligible€to€receive€anyÏpermanent€partial€disability€benefits€and€the€pre„injury€employer€returns€theÏemployee€to€employment€at€a€wage€equal€to€or€greater€than€the€wage€theÏemployee€was€receiving€at€the€time€of€the€injury,€the€maximum€permanent€partialÏdisability€award€that€the€employee€may€receive€is€two€and€one„half€(2€1/2)€timesÏthe€medical€impairment€rating.€€In€making€determinations,€the€court€shallÏconsider€all€pertinent€factors,€including€lay€and€expert€testimony,€employeeððs€age,Ïeducation,€skills€and€training,€local€job€opportunities,€and€capacity€to€work€atÏtypes€of€employment€available€in€claimantððs€disabled€condition.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.ÏSection€50„6„241(a)(1).ÌÌà àà àFrom€our€assessment€of€the€evidence,€we€find€it€preponderatesÏagainst€an€award€based€on€45€per€cent€(45%)€vocational€impairment€to€the€bodyÏas€a€whole,€and€in€favor€of€one€based€on€37.5€per€cent€(37/5%)€impairment€to€theÏbody€as€a€whole.€€The€judgment€is€modified€accordingly.ÌÌà àà àAs€modified,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€onÏappeal€are€taxed€to€the€parties,€one„half€(1/2)€to€each.›ÌÌÌÌà àà àœÓÓòòà àà àà àà à›€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà ààHMM*àóó€€€€€€€à àLeonard€W.€Martin,€JudgeÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌóóLyle€Reid,€Associate€JusticeÌÌÌòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌóóJoe€C.€Loser,€Jr.,€JudgeÌÌÌà àà àÌÌÌœÇÑ ` ÑÔ€'Ôà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÔ€'XÔÌÌÌÓ#` p…X LÐ X#ÓJAMES€RAY€SCOTT,à àà à)à àDYER€CHANCERYÌÓ#` p` LÐ X#Óà à)à àNO.€€95„C„255ÌÓ` p` ¸ ’XÓà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à à)à àÌÓ#` p` ¸ LÐ X#Óà àà à)à àHon.€J.€Steven€Stafford,Ìvs.à àà à)à àChancellorÌà àà à)ÌMA€HANNA€COMPANY,à à)à àNO.€02S01„9608„CH„00073Ìd/b/a€COLONIAL€RUBBER€WORKS,€INC.à à)ÌßJ€&);+'b|S` Å `€@ÿJßand€RELIANCE€INSURANCE€COMPANY,à à)Ìà àà à)Ìà àDefendants/Appellants.à à)à àAFFIRMED€AS€MODIFIED.ÌÌÌÌà@ àÔ€'¼ÔJUDGMENT€ORDERÔ€'XÔÌÌÓÓÌÓ` 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€ofÍthe€Court.Ìà àCosts€will€be€paid€equally€by€Appellee€and€Appellant,€for€whichÏexecution€may€issue€if€necessary.Ìà àIT€IS€SO€ORDERED€this€17th€day€of€April,€1997.ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPER€CURIAMÌ(Reid,€J.,€not€participating)ÌÌÌÌÔ€"ÔÔ€"¼Ô›