WPC" }hT%z;2h[%em%"Aam2kirhP9 #i1 7z@>e5G}薊r?}FZ0/"rP޺*v8fdQ#=F,Zi֖f7_dBn V5MXi>/wGEb0\2@;1,y!+i)8~,57=C(q9Ͽ2Iً/ЋIdLB8hB6Hņ0\T'}L9 g0K+l#%|F=LN T&>d@ӛ7 Xe7_.:0|\# iqmoXBG q3Q>]!opd*r&񕆯c@a\,&Q6rޠ GrMևJD7?V9jĂKJkC'bjJ ?j# % ^ 0 UIN/ w} 4 z    m U+@ I aNE 0DGNE 1ut 72 z 0Cob 0 0 0e 06 0 0 0 0\\\\ B GG 0d D5 D-= 0Kjj AS 0 0Dr! A!!!!!!!! 1ea"HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL6V,,,,V0Fxs1 (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regularwe0:i+00 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.wpt3|xU(9 Z(Times New Roman Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5  R $      1  XX  _d XXInIveyv.TransGlobalGas&Oil,3S.W.3d441,447(Tenn.1999),ourSupremeCourtruledthatvocational  disabilityforaninjurytoascheduledmembercannotbeadjudgedaspermanentandtotalundertheworkers q compensationlaw.#XX d~#Ԁ('$  2    R $      2  XX  _Ԁd XXSee_Marable_Ԁv.KeyIndustries,1998Tenn.LEXIS678(Tenn.WorkersCompPanel,Nov.10,1998)( If  anemployeesufferspermanentpartialdisabilitytotwomemberslistedtogetherasascheduledinjury,itisproperto  computetheperiodofdisabilityaccordingtotheschedule.)(citing.#XX d#d XXQueenv.NewYorkUnderwriters,222Tenn.235, Z 435S.W.2d122(1968)#XX d=#3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPT C:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt* (_1723  Ԁ- -*GM (_16   /%` ` hp x /23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *DM (_15   ," hp x ,23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *AM (_14  ` ) hp x )23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *>M (_13   &hhp x &23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *;M (_12   #p x #23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *8M (_11  h  p x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  *5M (_10   pp x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  (|G2 $ !..8ydd8         0  XX d(|3?$ !..8ydd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3?$ !..8ydd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK-/012345 35;AGMSY_11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1. !.8ydd8     _y8XXdd8  yNy @  @  @  @ @@7 7 INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE  SPECIALWORKERSCOMPENSATIONAPPEALSPANEL # @@ATNASHVILLE#yyN# F June2004Session i XXy #yXX<#LARRYTHRASHERv.CARRIERCORPORATION,etal.XXy   b @@ DirectAppealfromtheChanceryCourtforCoffeeCounty  \ @@No.99401L.CraigJohnson,JudgesittingasChancellor  F @@*AV) ` dE<` A   No.M200301217_WC_ԄR3CVMailedOctober19,2004   #yXX#XXyFiledNovember19,2004   AV) ` dE<j` A k       XuXXXThisworkerscompensationappealhasbeenreferredtotheSpecialWorkersCompensation c AppealsPaneloftheSupremeCourtinaccordancewithTennesseeCodeAnnotated506 L 225(e)(3)forhearingandreportingtotheSupremeCourtoffindingsoffactsandconclusionsoflaw. 5 Thiscase,submittedonbriefs,isbeforethePanelforasecondtime.Inthefirstappealfiledbythe n employer,thisPanelreducedthetrialcourtsawardof100%permanentpartialdisabilityforwork W relatedinjuriestotheemployees twofeetto40%permanentpartialdisabilityto eachfoot.The @ employerbringsasecondappealcontendingthatthetrialcourterredininterpretingthePanels ) judgmentmodifyingtheaward.Theemployeecontendsthatthisisbothafrivolousappealanda  badfaithefforttoavoidpayingtheemployeehisworkerscompensationbenefits.ThePanelhas  concludedthatthejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.#XXX Xuo#Ԁ#yXX#XXy  c   Tenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(1999)AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheChanceryCourt f Affirmed.  P     JamesL._Weatherford_,_Sr.J._#yX] #XX.y,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichFrank_Drowota_,iii, #!s  C.J.,andJohnA._Turnbull_,_Sp.J._,joined.  "\! B.Timothy_Pirtle_,_McMinnville_,Tennessee,fortheappellants,CarrierCorporationandInsurance #.# CompanyoftheStateofPennsylvania. $ $ DonaldJ.Ray,_Tullahoma_,Tennessee,fortheappellee,LarryThrasher. &!& Q   MEMORANDUMOPINION #yXX #XXy k(#(   #yXX#XXy XuXXX  Mr.LarryThrasherisa30yearemployeeofCarrierCorporation,whosejobdutiesrequired >*%* himtostandonhisfeetforlongperiodsoftime.OnSeptember10,1999,Mr.Thrasherfileda '+w&+ complaintforworkerscompensationbenefitsallegingthathehaddevelopedbilateralplantar ,`', _fasciitis_Ԁasaresultofhisemployment. ,I(-  -2).4 _  FindingthatMr.Thrasherhadsufferedaninjurywithinthecourseandscopeofhis  employment,thetrialcourtfoundthatMr.Thrasherhadsustaineda29%permanentpartialmedical  impairmentto bothfeetandawarded72.5%permanentpartialdisabilityto bothfeet.# + X Xu(# XuX  +Thetrial  courtalsofoundthatunderthelawMr.Thrashersrecoverywaslimitedto2timestheimpairment k rating.#XXX XuG# XuXXXԀ# + X Xu# XuX  + T   Mr.Thrasherfiledamotiontoalteroramendthecourtsrulingthatthecapscontainedin & v Tenn.CodeAnn.506241appliedtothiscase:  _ 8  [I]njuriesto twofeetareconsideredinjuriestoscheduledmembers.[T.C.A.50  1  6207(z).]Injuriestoscheduledmembersarenotsubjecttothecapsoftwoandone    halftimesthemedicalimpairmentcontainedinT.C.A.506241.(Atchleyv.Life   CareCenterofCleveland,906S.W.2d428,431.)      Afterhearingthemotion,thetrialcourtagreedthatthestatutorycapdidnotapplyandfound n  that thatlossoftwofeetisascheduledmemberandnotcombinedasaninjurytothebodyasa W  whole.PursuanttotheremainderoftheCourtsfindingsinregardstotheinjury,theCourtsamends @ itspreviousopinionandassessesapermanentpartialdisabilityofonehundredpercent(100%)to )y thetwofeetoftheplaintiff.Carrierappealed. b   OnNovember20,2002,thePanelissuedanopinionstatingthat [t]hefindingof100 4 percentisexcessiveandisreducedto40percent.ThePanelfoundthatthetrialcourtsfindingof  100%disabilitytothetwofeetwasnotsupportedbyapreponderanceoftheevidencebecausethe  employee1) improveddramaticallywithconservativetreatment;2)returnedtohisjob;and3)  worksinhisgarden,mowsgrass,etc.athome.InitsopinionthePanelstatedthat: theschedule  governswhateverawardshallbemadetoonesustainingeithertotalorpartialloss,orlossofuse, q ofascheduledmember.Inregardstothetrialcourts100%permanentpartialdisabilityfinding Z thePanelnoted: Asidefromthefactthatapartialdisabilityof100percentisincongruous,the C evidencedoesnotwarrantafindingequivalenttothelossofbothandbyextrapolation,tototaland ,| permanentdisabilitytothebodyasawhole. '  1      ׀ e   ThePanelstated: Theevidencepreponderatesagainstafindingof100percentdisability  7 tobothfeet,andinfavorofafindingof40percentpermanent,partialdisabilitytoeachfoot.The !   judgmentwillbemodifiedaccordingly.#XXX Xu# XuXXX# + X Xu# XuX  +Ԁ " !   Afterthecasewasremandedtothetrialcourtforenforcement,thetrialcourtenteredan $# ordercompellingCarriertorespondtoMr.Thrashersdiscoveryrequestsonassetstopaythe t% $ judgment.ThecourtnotedthatthepartieshadadisagreementabouttheopinionissuedbythePanel. ]&!% However,thetrialcourtspecificallyfoundthataccordingtothePanelsopinion,Mr.Thrasherwas F'"& entitledtorecover40%permanentpartialdisabilityfortwofeetpursuanttoTenn.CodeAnn.506 /(#' 207(3)(a)(z)resultingin160weeksofpermanentpartialdisabilitybenefits.    CarrierfiledthissecondappealtothePanelandraisestheissueofwhetherthetrialcourt  erredininterpretingthejudgmentfromtheTennesseeSupremeCourtapprovingandacceptingthe k  MemorandumOpinionoftheSpecialWorkersCompensationAppealsPanelmodifyingtheaward T from100%tobothfeetto40%toeachfoot. =    Ourreviewofthefindingsoffactmadebythetrialcourtisdenovoupontherecordofthe  _ trialcourt,accompaniedbyapresumptionofcorrectness,unlessthepreponderanceoftheevidence  H isotherwise.Tenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(2).TheapplicationofthisstandardrequiresthisCourt  1  toweighinmoredepththefactualfindingsandconclusionsofthetrialcourtsinworkers    compensationcases.SeeCorcoranv.FosterAutoGMC,Inc.,746S.W.2d452,456(Tenn.1988).#XXX Xu# XuXXX     Conclusionsoflawarerevieweddenovowithoutanypresumptionofcorrectness.Iveyv.Trans   GlobalGas&Oil,3S.W.3d441,446(Tenn.1999#XXX Xu&# XuXXX).     TennesseeCodeAnnotated506207(3)(A)providesinpertinentpart: W  8  (3)PermanentPartialDisability.)y   8  b   8  (A)Incaseofdisabilitypartialincharacterbutadjudgedtobepermanent,thereshall K bepaidtotheinjuredemployee,inadditiontothebenefitsprovidedby50-6-204, 4 thefollowing:   8   `     h   ***   8  (n)Forthelossofafoot,sixty-sixandtwo-thirdspercent(662/3%)ofaverage  weeklywagesforonehundredtwenty-five(125)weeks;   8  0`   0 ` ` 0 0h  0h h ***q   8  (z)Forthelossoftwo(2)feet,sixty-sixandtwo-thirdspercent(662/3%)average Z weeklywagesduringfourhundred(400)weeks;C     Tenn.CodeAnn.506207(3)(A)(n),(z). e 8  N     InsupportofitscontentionthatthePanelsopinionappliedsection(n)tothiscase,Carrier  7 pointstothefollowingportionofthePanelopinion: !   8  Theevidencepreponderatesagainstafindingof100percentdisabilitytobothfeet, #" andinfavorofafindingof40percentpermanent,partialdisabilitytoeachfoot.The $# judgmentwillbemodifiedaccordingly. #XXX Xu'# XuXXXt% $       Carrieracknowledgesinitsbriefthatifsection(z)applies,Mr.Thrasherisentitledtoat G'"& leastanadditional60weeksofcompensationattherateof$515.00perweekor$30,900# + X Xua# XuX  +.Carrier#XXX Xu.# 0(#' tenderedandMr.Thrasherwithdrew$51,500.00and$7,916.63fromtheClerkoftheCourtinpartial )i$( satisfactionofthejudgmentpendingappeal. XuXXX *R%) # + X Xu0# XuX  +  Itiswell-settledthatwhentheinjuryistoascheduledmember,thedisabilityawardis +$'+ exclusivelycontrolledbytheimpairmentratingestablishedbytheGeneralAssemblyforthat  member.McIlvainv.RussellStover,996S.W.2d179,185(Tenn.1999).#XXX Xu$1##yXX{1#XXy XuXXXԀInjuryto afootor two  feetarebothscheduledinjuries.    InTennlitev.Lassiter,561S.W.2d157(Tenn.1978)ourSupremeCourtstated: T 8  Byprovidingspecificformulasforcombinedinjuriestocertainmembers,the & v legislaturehasrecognizedthevirtuallyuncontrovertiblefactthatacombinationof  _ injuriestomembersofthebodyhasagreaterdisablingeffectthanthemere  H arithmeticalsumofindividualscheduledawardswouldreflect.T.C.A.50-1007).  1  Theawardforasimultaneousinjurytoalegandhand(basedon400weeks)is    greater,forexample,thanthesumofawardsforinjurytoaleg(200weeks)anda   hand(150weeks).      561S.W.2dat158. '  2      ׀#XXX Xu93# XuXXX# + X Xu3# XuX  + n    AfterreviewingthePanelsopinionwefindnoevidencetosupportCarrierscontentionthat @ thePanelmodifiedthejudgmentsothatthe40%disabilityratingappliedtoeachfootpursuantto )y section(n).# + X Xu7# XuX  +#XXX Xuu7# XuXXXTennesseeCodeAnnotated506207(3)(A)(ii)(z)providesscheduledbenefitsforthe b lossoftwofeet.ItisundisputedthatMr.Thatcherinjured twofeetwithinthecourseandscope K ofhisemploymentwithCarrier,thereforesection(z)applies.ThePanelsopinionmodifyingthe 4 awardfrom100%to40%centeredonitsfindingthataccordingtotheevidencehewasnot100%  disabled.#XXX XuY9# XuXXX# + X Xu9# XuX  +  Ѐ     i-/012345(03  #XXX Xu;# XuXXX# + X Xu;# XuX  +Basedontheaboveauthoritiesandtheentirerecordinthiscase,wefindthatthetrial  courtdidnoterrininterpretingthePanel'spreviousjudgment. q Ѐ  Z #XXX Xu<# XuXXX# + X Xu=# XuX  +  Aftercarefullyreviewingtherecord,wefindthatalthoughCarriersappeallacksmeritit C doesnotrisetotheleveloffrivolousappealinlightofthewordingofthePanelsopinion ,| discussedabove.WealsofindtheissueofbadfaithefforttoavoidpayingbenefitsraisedbyMr. e Thrashertobewithoutmerit. N #XXX Xu2># XuXXX# + X Xut># XuX  +  Tenn.CodeAnn.506225(h)(1)provides: !   Ѐ8  Ifthejudgmentordecreeofacourtisappealedpursuanttosubsection(e),interest #" onthejudgmentordecreeshallbecomputedfromthedatethatthejudgmentor $# decreeisenteredbythetrialcourtatanannualrateofinterestfive(5)percentage t% $ pointsabovetheaverageprimeloanrateforthemostrecentweekforwhichsuch ]&!% anaverageratehasbeenpublishedbytheboardofgovernorsofthe_federal F'"& reservesystemonthetotaljudgmentawardedbythesupremecourt.Forpurposes  ofcalculatingtheaccrualofinterestpursuanttothissubdivision,theaverage  primeloanrateonthedaythejudgmentordecreeisenteredbythetrialcourt  shallbeused.k     AcknowledgingtheremedialnatureoftheWorkersCompensationLawourSupreme & v Courtstated:  _ Ѐ  H 8  ThestatuteisclearthatwhenthecaseisappealedtothisCourtinterestistobe  1  calculated"fromthedatethatthejudgmentordecreeisentered."Thelegislature    obviouslyenvisionedmodificationsofawardsbytheSupremeCourtbecausethe   statutereadsthatinterestshallaccrue"onthetotalamountawardedbythe   SupremeCourt." Butregardlesswhetherthejudgmentordecreeismodified,   theclearlegislativemandateisthatinterestbecomputedonthejudgment q  fromthedateitisoriginallydeterminedthataninjuredemployeeisentitled [  tobenefits. Ifthelegislaturehadintendedforpost-judgmentinteresttobegin E accruingonthedateofamodificationbythisCourt,nodoubtitwouldhave 1 indicatedasmuch.j     _McClain_Ԁv.HenryI.SiegelCo.,834S.W.2d295(Tenn.1992).See_Eddlemon_Ԁv. < TecumsehProducts,101S.W.3d57(Tenn.1999);WestAmerican_Insur_.Co.v.Montgomery, % 861S.W.2d230(Tenn.1993).#XXX XuW@# XuXXX# + X Xu@# XuX  +    Thereforewefindthattheplaintiff,Mr.Thrasherisentitledtointerestonaccruedbut  unpaiddisabilitybenefitsonthejudgmentfromwhichhewasoriginallydeterminedentitledto y benefits.# + X XuJ# XuX  +#XXX XuxJ# XuXXX b Ѐ  CONCLUSION 4 #XXX XuLL##yXX L#LXXy  ThejudgmentofthetrialcourtfindingthatMr.Thrasherisentitledto40%permanent  V partialimpairmenttotwofeetpursuanttoTenn.CodeAnn.506207(3)(A)(z)resultingin160  ? weekspermanentpartialdisabilityisaffirmed.Thiscaseisremandedtothetrialcourtforthe !(  calculationofinterestandanyfurtherproceedingsconsistentwiththisopinion.Costsaretaxed "! totheappellant. #"    `     h     ___________________________________ e&!%    `     h     JAMESL._WEATHERFORD_,_SR.J._  N'"& __yXX   @ #XXyP#yNXXINTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE  @ssSPECIALWORKERS'COMPENSATIONAPPEALSPANEL#XXyN Q#yXXԈ # @"JUNE2004SESSION F #XXyQ# yXX  LARRYTHRASHERv.CARRIERCORPORATION,#XXyVR#ETALyXX#XXyR#  ? uR@ ChanceryCourtforCoffeeCounty  9 @%%%No.99401  # @*AV) ` dE< ` A߈    @0 0 No.M200301217WCR3CVFiledNovember19,2004   AV) ` dE<s` A t   yXX#XXyT#@& JUDGMENT yXX#XXyBU#Ԉ l  yXX#XXyU#  ThiscaseisbeforetheCourtupontheentirerecord,includingtheorderofreferraltothe (x SpecialWorkers'CompensationAppealsPanel,andthePanel'sMemorandumOpinionsetting a forthitsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw,whichareincorporatedhereinbyreference. J   Whereupon,itappealstotheCourtthattheMemorandumOpinionofthePanelshouldbe  acceptedandapproved;and    Itis,therefore,orderedthatthePanel'sfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaware  adoptedandaffirmed,andthedecisionofthePanelismadethejudgmentoftheCourt. p   Costswillbepaidbytheappellant,CarrierCorporationandInsuranceCompanyofthe B StateofPennsylvania,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary. +{   ITISSOORDERED. M    `     h     PERCURIAMyXX#XXy,Z# $$   yXX#XXyZ#