WPCEA  xraV׮T֞jR3w!|ݳ1WtNV8 -\DEr])%YqriћGٸ1Xkyh*d!@g@+>¯a]֗pRB@X 8viM[Ӝ4YqI.<;-3F^v *!E5 w{eiq3Zq N} #[bZ'kr 9.!7vc!4s&pɀ`{8 ͩĔ7[w4ux,{9݇>9B}-V0IHaŞ/ ǮjOdK*Y\7YY*:RD&Y^aJĄ5 fm5fTVX"BX>'ZT[>I^QSUBL#̲J`3o]~5>HGݽD~8=NޟYKxUN % 0#l 5  ^ z !! mw b4(N< 0D> &E 0U b ^p 0            0  0 0 0 0 0i 0@ 0CbW 0_ 06 0  0 0 0t 0< 0! 0@! 0" 0" 0# 0t$ 0?% 0& 0& 0' 00K( 0<{( 0( 0>u) 0v) 0`)* 0`* 0`* 0`I+ 0`+ 08 , 0A, 02- 0E- 0:A. 0Y{. 0_. 0 3/ 0=0 0j(1 02 B*4 B @4 D/]4 04 D505 D-e5 0K5 05 ASa77 0z8 0D9 Ab9 D/ : 0<: 06 ; 0@; 0:H< 0^< 0<< 0N=U6j=U>=U*=N> 1u > 72> 0c>N? z??b@UNj@U@@ AM@("  Z6Times New Roman RegularX(`$.8dd8    \\IB27S11\STATS1,,,,0C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\CUSTOM~1\OPINION3.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\Custom WP Templates\opinion3.wptR1,  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.wptULevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5+M (_22   &hhp x &23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *;+M (_21   #p x #23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *8+M (_20  h  p x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *5+M (_19   pp x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  *2+M (_18    x 23  ..  5+ ` hp x 5  * (_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  (2M &_9    x 23  Ԁ  5+ ` hp x 5  ( &_823  (GM &_7   /%` ` hp x /23   5+ ` hp x 5  (DM &_6   ," hp x ,23   5+ ` hp x 5  (AM &_5  ` ) hp x )23   5+ ` hp x 5  (>M &_4   &hhp x &23   5+ ` hp x 5  (;M &_3   #p x #23   5+ ` hp x 5  (8M &_2  h  p x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  (5M &_1   pp x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  &2M $_    x 23   5+ ` hp x 5  0.Normal<:Definition T<AA:Definition L , 5+ ` hp x 5  5+ ` hp x 586Definition(''&H1      (&H2  (&H3  (&H4 XXX (&H5  (&H6  20Address8MM6Blockquote , , 5+ ` hp x 5   5+ ` hp x 5,*CITE,dl*CODEKj<6X9`(Courier NewKSk\  `&Times New RomanS42Emphasis64Hyperlink    <:FollowedHype    4go2Keyboard Kj<6X9`(Courier NewKSk\  `&Times New RomanS (|G2[$ !.8B4dXXd8         0  XXXX<:Preformatted/%  ,Kk %#/Kj<6X9`(Courier NewKSk\  `&Times New RomanS/%  ,Kk %#/<:zBottom of 7W(X7  ?l%2A`Arial?  Sk\  `&Times New RomanS7Z(X7&0 d d dU)1dxd(|3I>$ !.8B4dXXd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  <:zTop of For7b(X7  ?l%2A`Arial?  Sk\  `&Times New RomanS7Z(X7^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3I>$ !.8B4dXXd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKKU)2dxd0KS.SampleKj<6X9`(Courier NewKSk\  `&Times New RomanS0.Strong 8dl6TypewriterKj<6X9`(Courier NewKSk\  `&Times New RomanS42Variable: 8HTML MarkupB      2 0CommentB  (O$<6X9`(Courier New\  `&Times New Roman%2A`Arial3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)ni)(;3$2#  0  .3  0  sC:\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 (hH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular(9 Z(Times New Roman X[ZA<< c !.8C,dd8     __ eC,XX8XXdd8  XeC,  INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE  SPECIALWORKERSCOMPENSATIONAPPEALSPANEL & @@ATJACKSON#C,Xe# :L JANUARY16,2004Session `r XXC, #C,XX?#%  JUDYGAYTODD%Ԁv.%  %CONTINENTALCASUALTYCOMPANY  ^p XXC,@@ %  %HDirectAppealfromthe%  ChanceryCourt%}for%  ԀGibson% County   @@No.% ! 15972%!% " Ԁ%"(GeorgeR.Ellis,Chancellor p  @@*AV) ` dE<3` A 4F  No.% # ԀW200301019_ WC_ ԄR3CV%#ԄMailedSeptember2,2004;FiledOctober15,2004 /A  AV) ` dE<` A   %      Thisworkers'compensationappealhasbeenreferredtotheSpecialWorkers'CompensationAppeals  PaneloftheSupremeCourtinaccordancewithTennesseeCodeAnnotatedSection506225(e)(3)  forhearingandreportingtotheSupremeCourtoffindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw.Thetrial  courtdeterminedthattheplaintiffsuffereda69%vocationalimpairmenttothebodyasawhole.The  defendantinsurerassertsthat:1)thattheplaintiffhadameaningfulreturntoworkandthatthe2.5  timescapsshouldapply;and2)thatifthecapsdonotapply,theawardwasexcessiveandnot  supportedbytheevidence.Forthereasonssetforthbelow,weaffirmthejudgementofthetrial v court. bt % % $   Tenn.CodeAnn.506225(e)(1999)AppealasofRight%$ ; :L Judgmentofthe% % ChanceryCourt%%  Affirmed  &8   %  JamesF.Butler,Sp.J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichJaniceM.Holder,J.,and  JamesL._ Weatherford_ ,_ Sr.J._ ,joined.  P.AllenPhillips,Jackson,Tennessee,fortheappellant%q ,ContinentalCasualtyCompany.  ! ArtD.Wells,Jackson,Tennessee,%  % fortheappellee,JudyGayTodd. "# e  MEMORANDUMOPINION  b%t"&   e  Plaintiffwas,attimeoftrial,a49yearoldfemale.SheobtainedherGEDandarealestate :'L$( license,butithadexpired.PriortobeginningworkforMilanSeatingSystems("MSS"),sheworked &(8%) asasewingmachineoperatorandproductionworker.ShewasemployedbyMSSin1986asa )$&* sewingmachineoperatorandworkedatvariousotherpositionswithMSSuntilshebecamea )'+ supervisor.AsasupervisorPlaintiffworkedasalineleader,productionmanagerinthecutting *', department,andlaterassupervisoroftheGMjumpseatline.MSSmakesseatcoversforvehicles. +(- Itisproductionlinework.Assupervisor,Plaintiffwasresponsibleforfillinginontheline,helping ,). sew,andassemblingseatswithanairgun.Sheinjuredhershoulderwhileworkingonthejumpseat -*/ _ lineonJune10,1999.Propernoticewasgiventoheremployer.Afterherinjury,shewasmovedto  theheadrestdepartment.     MedicalEvidence   =  FollowingPlaintiff'sinjuryshewastreatedbyDr.Twillaforseveralmonthsandthensentto  Dr.LowellStonecipher.Dr.Stoneciphertreatedherconservativelyforseveralmonths,anddidan v MRIinNovember1999,whichindicatedPlaintiffmayhavearotatorcufftear.Surgerywas b t performedandalthoughatearoftherotatorcuffwasnotseen,animpingementwaspresent.Dr. N ` Stonecipherdidanacromialdecompressionanddistalclavicalexcision.Plaintiffwassenttophysical : L  therapywithgoodresults.InApril2000,Dr.Stonecipherdischargedplaintiffwitha10%impairment & 8  totherightarm.InAugust2000,PlaintiffreturnedtoDr.Stonecipherwithmoresymptoms,andhe  $  injectedhershoulderanddischargedheragaininOctober2000.Sixmonthslater,Plaintiffreturned    toDr.StonecipherwithadditionalsymptomsandanotherMRIindicatedatearoftherotatorcuff,and   shewasagainscheduledforsurgery.Againthesurgeondidnotseeatearoftherotatorcuff,butthe   tendonwasdegenerative.Thedegenerativeportionwastakenoutsurgically,andPlaintiffdidwell   thereafterandwasdischarged.    Dr.StoneciphergavePlaintiffanadditionalimpairmentratingof5%forthesecondsurgery,  foratotalof15%impairmenttotherightarm,whichconvertsto9%tothebodyasawhole.Dr. r Stonecipheropinedthattheproblemsforwhichhetreatedtheplaintiffcouldbecausallyrelatedto ^p theliftingofthe25poundseatsatherjobandthatshereachedmaximummedicalimprovementon J\ May6,2001,whenhedischargedher. 6H   PlaintiffwasseenbyDr.JosephBoalsonJuly22,2002,forthepurposeofanindependent   medicalevaluation.AfterexaminingPlaintiff,testingherrangeofmotion,xrayinghershoulderand   reviewinghermedicalrecordsandhistory,Dr.BoalsdiagnosedPlaintiffwithresidualsfromaninjury  totherightshoulderrequiringsurgery.Hefeltshehadpermanentimpairmentfromthesurgeries,  moresowiththefirstsurgerythanthesecond.Usingadiagnosisbasedestimateofimpairment,Dr.  Boalsassignedpermanentimpairmentratingsof10%fortheacromioplasty,10%fortheclavicle  excisionand5%fortherotatorcufftear,foracombinationofanoverall24%totheupperextremity  or14%tothebodyasawhole.HefurtheropinedthatPlaintiffshouldavoidheavyoverheadwork,  workawayfromthebody,workthatrequiredrepetitiveflexionorrotationoftheshoulder,andthat n   heronetimeweightlimitshouldbedeterminedbyworktrial. Z!l!   StandardofReview  2#D #   Appellatereviewisdenovoupontherecordofthetrialcourt,accompaniedbyapresumption  %"% ofthecorrectnessofthefindingsoffacts,unlessthepreponderanceoftheevidenceisotherwise. %#& Tenn.Code.Ann.506225(e)(2)(2002Supp.).Thereviewingcourtisrequiredtoconductan &#' independentexaminationoftherecordtodeterminewherethepreponderanceoftheevidencelies. '$( Wingertv.GovernmentofSumnerCounty,908S.W.2d921,922(Tenn.Workers'Comp.Panel1995). (%) ThestandardgoverningappellatereviewoffindingsoffactbyatrialcourtrequirestheSpecial )&* Workers'CompensationPaneltoexamineindepthatrialcourt'sfactualfindingsandconclusions. *'+ GAFBldg.Materialsv.George,47S.W.3d430,432(Tenn.Workers'Comp.Panel2001).Thetrial ~+(, court'sfindingswithrespecttocredibilityandweightoftheevidencemaygenerallybeinferredfrom j,|)- themannerinwhichthecourtresolvesconflictsinthetestimonyanddecidesthecase.Tobittv.  Bridgestone/Firestone,Inc.,59S.W.3d57,61(Tenn.2001).Wherethetrialcourthasseenandheard  witnesses,especiallywheretheissuesofcredibilityandweightoforaltestimonyareinvolved,  considerabledeferencemustbeaccordedthetrialcourt'sfactualfindings.Humphreyv.David  Witherspoon,Inc.,734S.W.2d315(Tenn.1987).Theextentofaninjuredworker'svocational  disabilityisaquestionoffact.Sealsv.England/CorsairUpholsteryMfg.,984S.W.2d912,915  (Tenn.1999). v   MeaningfulReturntoWork N `   %  Thefirstissueraisedbythedefendantiswhetherthetrialcourterredinfindingthatthe & 8  plaintiffdidnotmakeameaningfulreturntowork.UndertheprovisionsofTennesseeCode  $  AnnotatedSection506241(a)(1),aninjuredemployeewhoreturnstoheremploymentatawage    equaltoorgreaterthanthewageshewasreceivingatthetimeofinjurycannotrecoveranawardmore   than2.5timesthemedicalimpairmentratingfoundbythemedicalexperts.Thelanguageof   TennesseeCodeAnnotatedSection506241(b)providesthataninjuredemployeewhodoesnot   returntoheremploymentatawageequaltoorgreaterthanthewageshewasreceivingatthetime  ofinjurycanrecoveranawarduptosixtimesthemedicalimpairmentrating.    Todeterminewhichstatutorycapapplies,wemustdecidewhethertheplaintiffmadea r meaningfulreturntowork.Whatconstitutesameaningfulreturntoworkisahighlyfactspecific ^p analysis.See,e.g.,Newtonv.ScottHealthCareCtr.,914S.W.2d884,886(Tenn.Workers'Comp. J\ Panel1995). 6H   Inthiscase,theplaintiffwasreturnedtoworkinNovember2001atthesamewageandwas   subsequentlygivenaraiseandbonus.Shetestifiedthatsheplannedoncontinuingherworkhadshe   notbeenterminated.Plaintifffiledherworkers'compensationsuitonJune3,2002,andtheemployer  becameawareofthesuitonJune7,2002.PlaintiffwasterminatedonJune10,2002.Shereceived  aseverancepackage.Herapplicationforunemploymentwasnotcontestedbytheemployer.Plaintiff  claimsshewasterminatedbecauseshefiledaworkers'compensationclaimandthereforeshedidnot  haveameaningfulreturntowork.DefendantcontendsthatPlaintiffwasterminatedforalegitimate  reason,i.e.,violationofcompanypolicy.    Theplaintifftestifiedthatshewasawareoftheemployer'sopendoorpolicy.Her Z!l! understandingofthepolicywasthattheemployeeswereabletotalktotheiremployeeadvocate,but F"X" shedidnotthinktheemployeeadvocatewassupposedtocomeontheproductionlineandinterfere 2#D # withproduction.Theprioremployeeadvocatehadherownofficeandnevercamedowntotheline $0!$ anddisturbedpeople.Shesaidshewasnotcounseledontheemployeeadvocatecomingtotheline  %"% anddisturbingproduction.Ifanemployeewantedtotalktotheadvocate,shewouldgetsomeoneto %#& taketheemployee'splaceontheline. &#'   Plaintiffinjuredhershoulderatwork.Sheunderwenttwosurgicalproceduresforhershoulder (%) injury.AfterthesecondsurgeryshewasreleasedtofulldutyinNovember2001.Shefiledher )&* workers'compensationlawsuitonJune5,2002.DaphneJohnson,Employer'shumanresource *'+ manager,becameawareofthelawsuitonFriday,June7,2002.Theplaintiffwasterminatedon ~+(, Monday,June10,2002.PlaintiffstatedshewasterminatedbyJohnsonforshowingfavoritismand j,|)- interferingwiththeemployeeadvocate,GlennBigham.Bighamtestifiedthathisfulltimejobwas  tobetheliaisonbetweenthehourlyassociatesandthemanagement.Undertheopendoorpolicy,an  employeehastherighttotalktotheemployeeadvocate.Therewasanissueastowhetherthe  employeecanconferwiththeadvocatewhiletheemployeeisworkingontheproductionline.  Plaintifftestifiedthatshedidnotknowtheemployeeadvocatecouldcometotheproductionlineand  disturbproduction.DeborahColemanwasanemployeeunderplaintiff'ssupervision.Concerning  Coleman'sconversationswiththeemployeeadvocate,ColemanclaimedPlaintifftoldher"ifIfind v outthatyouaredoublecrossingme,youwillhavehelltopay."Plaintiffdeniedthestatement. b t JohnsontestifiedthatColemantoldheraboutthisstatementbeforePlaintiffwasterminated. N ` ColemantestifiedshedidnottellJohnsonofthisstatementuntilafterPlaintiffwasterminated. : L  Plaintiffdeniedviolatingtheopendoorpolicy. & 8    DanielGraves,Plaintiff'scoworker,whentestifyingabouttheopendoorpolicy,stated,    "Theychangethepoliciesallthetime."GeraldRush,aformeremployeeofMSS,testifiedthathe   wasterminatedforaviolationoftheopendoorpolicy,butdeniedthatwasthetruereason.Hedenied   havingbeencounseledaboutthepolicypriortohistermination.LisaYoemansworkedatMSS   approximatelyeightyears,includingworkintheHumanResourcesDepartment.Sheconfirmedthat  MSShadanopendoorpolicywhichprovidedthatanemployeecouldgotoanysourceof  managementtodiscussworkproblems,butitwasnotsupposedtointerferewiththeproductionof  theline.GlennBigham,theemployeeadvocateatthetimeofPlaintiff'stermination,testifiedthat r heoftenwentoutintotheplantandtalkedtotheemployeesontheproductionline.DaphneJohnson, ^p theHumanResourcesManagerforMSS,testifiedPlaintiffwasterminatedforviolatingacompany J\ policy,whichentailedtheopendoorpolicy,whichincludescompanyphilosophy,charterand 6H constitutionofthecompany.Shestatedthattheemployeeadvocatecouldtalktoemployeesonthe "4 productionlinewhenitwasoperating,butthatifitwasgoingtotakealotoftime,anappointment   wouldbemadefortheemployee.ShetestifiedthatsheandPlaintiffhadtalkedinformallyabout   PlaintiffinterferingwiththeprocessonseveraloccasionspriortoPlaintiff'stermination.Shetestified  thatothersupervisorshadbeenterminatedduetoviolationoftheopendoorpolicy,noneofwhom  hadworkers'compensationclaimsagainstthecompany.Shedeniedplaintiffwasterminatedbecause  ofherlawsuitagainstthecompany.    ThetrialjudgemadeafindingoffactthatLisaYoemanspresentedtheonlyproofastothe  specificsoftheopendoorpolicyoftheemployerwhenshestatedthat"managementcouldgoin n   wheretheywantedtobutthattheemployeesweresupposedtoseetheemployeeadvocateontheir Z!l! owntimeandtheywouldnotinterferewithwork."Thetrialcourtalsofoundthatthedefendant F"X" presentednoproofofwhatthecharter,constitutionoranymanualstatedconcerningtheopendoor 2#D # policy. $0!$   Areviewingcourtmustgive"considerabledeference"tothetrialjudgewithregardtooral, %#& incourttestimonyasitisthetrialjudgewhohasviewedthewitnessesandheardthetestimony.See &#' Houser,36S.W.3dat71.Thisisparticularlytruewhenthecredibilityofthewitnessesandthe '$( weightassignedtotheirtestimonyarecriticalissues.SeeSeals,984S.W.2dat915. (%)   Becausethereisnorequirementthatatrialcourtmakeexpressfindingsoffactregardinga *'+ witness'scredibility,theabsenceofsuchfindingsdoesnotaltertheapplicablestandardofreview. ~+(, Thetrialcourt'sfindingswithrespecttocredibilityandtheweightoftheevidence,asinthepresent j,|)- case,generallymaybeinferredfromthemannerinwhichthetrialcourtresolvesconflictsinthe  testimonyanddecidesthecase.SeeTobittv.Bridgestone/Firestone,Inc.,59S.W.3d57,62(Tenn.  2001).    Ourreviewindicatesthatthetestimonysharplyconflictedwithrespecttowhytheplaintiffwas  terminatedfromheremployment.Insuchacase,theroleofthetrialjudge,whohasseenthe  witnessesandhasheardtheirtestimonyfirsthand,istoresolvetheconflicts.Inthiscase,thetrial v judgeresolvedtheconflictsbyitsfindingthatPlaintiffwasterminatedbecauseshefiledaworkers' b t compensationclaim.Wethereforeconcludethattheevidenceintherecorddoesnotpreponderate N ` againstthetrialcourt'sfinding.Accordingly,weaffirmthetrialcourt'sconclusionthatPlaintiffdid : L  nothaveameaningfulreturntowork. & 8     VocationalDisability     RJ  Defendantassertsthatevenifthecapsdonotapply,thatthetrialcourt'sawardof69%tothe   wholebodyisexcessive.Defendantcontendsthatafterreviewingallthepertinentfactorstheaward   shouldhavebeenlowerthansixtyninepercent(69%).Defendantcontendstheplaintiffhadworked  atmanypositionsthatincludedsewing,assemblyandsupervision.Further,Plaintiffwasabletowork  inasupervisorypositionsimilartothatheldatthedefendantemployer,herterminationwasnotdue  toherinabilitytoperformtherequiredtasks,andshehadbeenlookingforsupervisorytypejobs. r   PlaintiffcontendsthatalthoughshewasasupervisoratMSSforseveralyears,shehastried J\ tofindcomparableworkbutallsimilarjobsnowrequireadvanceddegrees.Shetestifiedthatshehad 6H takenarealestatecourseinJune1999buthadneversoldanything,andsheletherlicenceexpirein "4 December2001.Torenewit,shewouldhavetotakethecourseagainandtakeatest.Itwasun   rebuttedthatshewouldhavedifficultyindoinganyofthepreviousnonsupervisoryjobsbecauseit   wouldcausepaininhershoulderssecondarytorepetitivemotionorrequiredlifting.Plaintiffwas  unemployedatthetimeoftrial.Shehadappliedforandreceivedunemploymentbutthathadrunout.  Hersolesourceofincomewasrentalproperty.    Theextentofvocationaldisabilityisaquestionoffacttobedeterminedfromallofthe  evidence,includinglayandexperttestimony.Worthingtonv.ModineMfg.Co.,798S.W.2d232,234  (Tenn.1990).Inmakingdeterminationsofvocationaldisability,thecourtshallconsiderallpertinent n   factors,includinglayandexperttestimony,employee'sage,education,skillsandtraining,localjob Z!l! opportunities,andcapacitytoworkattypesofemploymentavailableinclaimant'sdisabledcondition. F"X" Tenn.CodeAnn.506241(a)(1);Robersonv.LorettoCasketCo.,722S.W.2d380,384(Tenn. 2#D # 1986). $0!$   Further,theclaimantsownassessmentofherphysicalconditionandresultingdisabilities %#& cannotbedisregarded.UptainConstr.Co.v.McClain,526S.W.2d458,459(Tenn.1975);TomStill &#' TransferCo.v.Way,482S.W.2d775,777(Tenn.1972).Thetrialcourtisnotboundtoaccepta '$( physician'sopinionregardingtheextentoftheplaintiffsdisability,butshouldconsiderallthe (%) evidence,bothexpertandlaytestimony,todecidetheextentofanemployeesdisability.Hinsonv. )&* WalMartStores,Inc.,654S.W.2d675,677(Tenn.1983).Wearetopresumethecorrectnessofthe *'+ trialcourtsfindingsunlessthepreponderanceoftheevidenceisotherwise.Humphreyv.David ~+(, Witherspoon,Inc.,734S.W.2d315,315(Tenn.1987). j,|)- Ї  Ourreviewofthelayandexperttestimony,aswellastheotherpertinentfactorsstatedabove,  revealsthattheplaintiffis49yearsoldandhasaGEDcertificate.Sherecountedtheproblemsshe  wouldhavedoingthetypeofworkshehaddonebeforesheobtainedhersupervisoryjobwithherlast  employer.Shehassoughtworkinthesupervisoryfieldwhichshecanperform,buthasbeen  unsuccessful.Sheiscurrentlyunemployed.Dr.Stonecipherratedheranatomicalimpairmentatnine  percent(9%)tothewholebody,relyingmoreonhisthirtyplus(30+)yearsofexperienceasan  orthopedicsurgeonthantheAMAGuides,FifthEdition.Dr.Boalsratedheranatomicalimpairment v atfourteenpercent(14%)tothewholebodyandopinedthatPlaintiffshouldavoidheavyoverhead b t work,workawayfromthebody,workthatrequiredrepetitiveflexionorrotationoftheshoulder,and N ` thatheronetimeweightlimitshouldbedeterminedbyworktrial.Whilesheisanemployable : L  person,Plaintiff'sabilitytocompeteinthejobmarkethasbeensubstantiallyimpairedasaresultof & 8  herinjuriesandpermanentmedicalrestrictions.Theplaintiff'sdiminishedearningcapacityis  $  evidencedbyhersubsequentinabilitytoobtainotheremployment.      Wheretheissuesinvolveexpertmedicaltestimonyandallthemedicalproofiscontainedin   therecordbydeposition,asitisinthiscase,thenthiscourtmaydrawitsownconclusionsaboutthe   weightandcredibilityofthattestimony,sinceweareinthesamepositionasthetrialjudge.With  theseprinciplesinmind,wereviewtherecordtodeterminewhethertheevidencepreponderates  againstthefindingsofthetrialcourt.Krickv.CityofLawrenceburg,945S.W.2d709,712(Tenn.  1997).Thetrialjudgemay,whenthereisadifferenceinopinionbetweentheexperts,acceptthe r opinionofoneexpertovertheopinionsofothers.Johnsonv.Midwesco,Inc.,801S.W.2d804(Tenn. ^p 1990).Wherethemedicaltestimonyispresentedbydeposition,thiscourtisabletomakeitsown J\ independentassessmentofthemedicalprooftodeterminewherethepreponderanceoftheevidence 6H lies.Wefindthattheevidencedoesnotpreponderateagainstthetrialcourt'sjudgement. "4   CONCLUSION    |b  Forthereasonsstatedherein,thejudgementofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.Costsaretaxedto  thedefendant.     `     h      p _______________________________     `     h      p JAMESF.BUTLER,SPECIALJUDGE n     F"X" @\ \ C,XXINTHESUPREMECOURTOFTENNESSEE  @ddSPECIALWORKERSCOMPENSATIONAPPEALSPANEL  @LL%ATJACKSON $ @"January16,2004 $6    JUDYGAYTODDv.CONTINENTALCASUALTYCOMPANY  HZ e@   ChanceryCourtforGibsonCounty n  @%No.15972   @*AV) ` dEa ` A߈   @U U No.W200301019WCR3CVFiledOctober15,2004   AV) ` dEa` A   @# JUDGMENTORDER  ( vC,C,   ` ThiscaseisbeforetheCourtupontheentirerecord,includingtheorder Rd ofreferraltotheSpecialWorkers'CompensationAppealsPanel,andthePanel's dv MemorandumOpinionsettingforthitsfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw,which v areincorporatedhereinbyreference;     ` Whereupon,itappearstotheCourtthattheMemorandumOpinionofthe  Panelshouldbeacceptedandapproved;and     ` Itis,therefore,orderedthatthePanel'sfindingsoffactandconclusions  oflawareadoptedandaffirmed,andthedecisionofthePanelismadethejudgment  oftheCourt.   Ѐ   ` CostsonappealaretaxedtotheAppellant,ContinentalCasualty *"< Company,forwhichexecutionmayissueifnecessary. <#N     ` ITISSOORDERED. `%r"" #C,vC,h#uC,C,   `     h     PERCURIAM (%% #C,uC,|l##XXC,d#