ÿWPCU 8#  UN+ %y 0(w@§4çû  1m 0c 0Jâ 0T,Æ€ÆFÆ ÆÒ 0^˜ 0hö 0r^ 0|Ð 0†L 0Ò 1ub AQ× Æ( 0Dî 0@2 0Dr 0d¶ D/ BI Bf D3ƒU>¶U*ôB)DCG AMŠ×(Üv~vÓ‚˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ(ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ 3E4 5 6P7 8 9 : ; < Ft‹#LÔ4Ôô3|x< #,e37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(;³º$´´Ô2,eÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52, 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) !"#%Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ'''÷ÿ dxd düÿP Pd&&&&'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d11117Border 1dd "2Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ûÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€/ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ!"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€0ÔÔ€0ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€0XÔÌÌò òJanuary€7,€1998ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€0ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€/ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ!"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€0ÔÔ€0ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€0XÔÌÌò òJanuary€7,€1998ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€0ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó 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€/ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€0Ô›œ›Þ ÞÌÌÌÙ€ ÙœßR€342A1-j|¾f` Å `€€@ÿRß›à@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌà@ àSPECIAL€WORKERSðð€COMPENSATION€APPEALS€PANELÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÌà@ àSeptember€29,€1997ÌÌÌÌÌÌJEANETTE€WILSON,à àà àà à)€Henry€County€Circuit€CourtÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)€No.€561Ìà àPlaintiff,à àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)€Hon.€C.€Creed€McGinley,€JudgeÌv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌTECUMSEH€PRODUCTSà àœà à›à à)€No.€œ02S01„9704„CV„00031›ÌCOMPANY,à àà àà àà àœà à)›Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant.à àà àà àà à)ÌÌÌÌÌòòFor€Plaintiffóó:à àà àà àà àœòòà àFor›€Defendantóó:ÌÌGayden€Drew,€IVà àà àà àà àDavid€F.€HessingÌDrew€&€Martindale,€P.C.à àà àœà à105›€E.€Wood€StreetÌ470€N.€Parkway,€Suite€Cà àà àœà àParis,›€TN€38242ÌJackson,€TN€3830à àà àà àà àÌÌÌÌà@ àòòMEMORANDUM€OPINIONóóÌÌà@ àÌÌÌÌà@ àòòMembers€of€Panelóó:ÌÌà@ àJANICE€M.€HOLDER,€JUSTICEÌà@ àHEWITT€P.€TOMLIN,€JR.,€SENIOR€JUDGEÌà@ àCORNELIA€A.€CLARK,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌAFFIRMEDà àà àà àà àà àà àTOMLIN,€SENIOR€JUDGEÌÑ7€ÆXXdìXXdì7ÑÌÌÓÓà àÌà àThis€workersðð€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€SpecialÏWorkersðð€Compensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€in€accordanceÏwith€T.C.A.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(3)€for€hearing€and€reporting€of€findings€of€fact€andÏconclusions€of€law.€€Tecumseh€Products€Company€œ(ð ðdefendantðð)›€has€raised€theÏfollowing€issues€by€this€appeal:€Did€the€trial€court€err€(1)€in€finding€that€plaintiffððsÏvocational€disability€arose€out€of€and€in€the€course€of€her€employment,€(2)€inÏawarding€plaintiff€temporary€total€disability€and€ordering€defendant€to€payÏcertain€medical€expenses,€(3)€in€finding€that€plaintiff€sustained€a€forty€percentÏpermanent€partial€disability€to€her€right€arm€and€thirty€percent€permanent€partialÏdisability€to€her€left€arm,€and€(4)€in€charging€certain€discretionary€costs€incurredÏby€plaintiff€to€defendant.€€We€find€no€error€and€affirm.Ìà àJeanette€Wilson€(ð ðplaintiffðð)€was€an€employee€of€defendant,€working€on€œa›Ïproduction€line.€€Her€duties€involved€using€a€screwdriver€to€adjust€wedges€onÍmotors€that€came€down€the€assembly€line.€€She€was€required€to€makeÏadjustments€on€one€side€of€the€motor,€turn€the€motor€over€and€makeÏadjustments€on€the€other€side.€€It€is€undisputed€that€these€functions€requiredÏplaintiff€to€use€both€of€her€hands€and€to€lift€motors€which€could€weigh€up€to€fortyÏpounds.Ìà àPlaintiff€had€no€difficulty€with€her€hands€and€arms€prior€to€coming€to€workÏfor€defendant.€€She€began€to€experience€problems€in€both€arms,€specifically€herÏright€wrist,€in€November,€1995.€€She€continued€to€work€until€the€conditionÏworsened€to€the€point€where€she€felt€obliged€to€see€a€doctor.€€Upon€notifying€theÏdefendant€of€her€condition,€defendant€provided€her€with€a€choice€of€threeÏphysicians€who€could€treat€her.€€Plaintiff€chose€Dr.€John€Holancin.€€Dr.€Holancin,Ïafter€examining€plaintiff,€placed€her€on€light€duty€and€referred€her€to€Dr.€RonaldÏBingham€for€a€diagnostic€test€called€an€EMG.€€This€test€revealed€that€plaintiffÏhad€no€median€sensory€slowing€in€either€wrist,€but€did€have€severe€medianÏmotor€conduction€slowing€across€both€wrists.€€He€concluded€that€plaintiff€wasÏsuffering€from€severe€carpal€tunnel€syndrome€in€both€hands.Ìà àPlaintiff€continued€to€work€until€such€time€as€her€hands€swelled€so€muchÏthat€she€was€unable€to€perform€her€work.€€In€the€note€that€was€written€by€herÏsupervisor€to€the€security€guard€authorizing€her€to€leave€the€factory€theÏsupervisor€wrote:€ð ðSwollen€hands,€unable€to€perform€her€job.ðð€€This€wasÏplaintiffððs€last€day€of€employment€by€defendant.€€Ìà àOn€her€own€initiative,€plaintiff€went€to€œsee›€Dr.€Anup€Satpathy,€whoÏreferred€her€to€Dr.€Joseph€Rowland,€a€neurosurgeon€in€Jackson.€€Dr.€RowlandÍperformed€surgery€on€plaintiffððs€right€wrist€in€July,€1996.€€He€determined€thatÏplaintiff€had€reached€maximum€medical€improvement€as€of€August€30,€1996€andÏassigned€her€a€ten€percent€permanent€partial€impairment€to€her€right€arm.€€Ìà àPlaintiff€also€saw€Dr.€Joseph€Boals€twice€at€the€request€of€her€attorney;Ïtwo€months€prior€to€Dr.€Rowlandððs€surgery€and€two€months€after€this€surgery.€ÏFollowing€his€first€examination,€Dr.€Boals€diagnosed€plaintiff€as€suffering€fromÏsevere€carpal€tunnel€syndrome€in€both€wrists,€chronic€biceps€tendinitis€of€theÏright€shoulder€and€de€Quervainððs€tenosynovitis€of€the€right€wrist.€€He€attributedÏplaintiffððs€injuries€to€the€work€she€was€performing€for€defendant.€€Ìà àAlthough€Dr.€Boals€testified€by€deposition€that€he€did€not€conduct€gripÏstrength€tests€during€this€first€evaluation,€he€later€discovered€his€notes€whichÏindicated€that€he€had€conducted€such€tests€during€the€initial€examination.€ÏThese€tests€revealed€below€normal€grip€strength€for€plaintiffððs€right€hand.€€HeÏtestified€that€plaintiff€suffered€a€thirty€percent€impairment€to€each€arm€basedÏupon€his€diagnosis€of€carpal€tunnel,€which€was€supported€by€the€results€of€Dr.ÏBinghamððs€EMG.€€Dr.€Boals€further€testified€that€he€arrived€at€this€disability€ratingÏusing€the€neuropathy€œtables›€in€the€AMA€guidelines€and€did€not€rely€on€the€gripÏstrength€tests€for€his€initial€rating.Ìà àIn€his€second€examination€of€plaintiff,€Dr.€Boals€œprimarily€evaluated›€theÏeffect€of€plaintiffððs€surgery€on€her€right€arm.€€He€stated€that€he€did€not€reevaluateÏplaintiffððs€left€arm€because€there€had€been€no€surgery€or€subsequent€EMG€onÏthat€arm.€€Dr.€Boals€stated€that€plaintiffððs€right€arm€had€improved€since€theÏsurgery,€and€although€the€grip€strength€test€scores€for€the€right€hand€were€lowerÍthan€what€they€had€been€prior€to€surgery,€Dr.€Boals€stated€that€this€was€anÏexpected€consequence€of€the€surgery€and€that€all€other€signs€showedÏimprovement.€€As€a€result,€Dr.€Boals€lowered€the€impairment€rating€he€had€givenÏearlier€for€plaintiffððs€right€arm€from€thirty€percent€impairment€to€twenty€percent.€ÏThe€grip€strength€test€for€the€left€side€was€unchanged€and€the€impairment€of€theÏleft€arm€remained€the€same€as€before€at€thirty€percent.Ìà àThe€trial€court€œfound›€plaintiff€to€be€a€credible€witness€and€œplaced›Ïsubstantial€weight€on€the€testimony€of€Dr.€œBoals.›€œ€The€court€also€awardedÏplaintiff€the€medical€and€travel€expenses€associated€with€her€visits€to€Dr.ÏRowland€as€well€as€the€deposition€costs€of€Dr.€Boals.ÌÓÓÌà@ àò òI.€Causation.ó óÌÌÌÓÓà àOur€scope€of€review€is€òòde€novoóó€upon€the€record€in€the€trial€court,Ïaccompanied€by€a€presumption€of€correctness€of€the€findings€of€fact€madeÏtherein,€unless€we€find€the€preponderance€of€evidence€to€be€otherwise.€€T.C.A.Ïðð€50„6„225(e)(2)€(Supp.€1997).€€In€addition,€this€tribunal€is€required€to€conductÏan€independent€examination€of€the€record€to€determine€where€theÏpreponderance€of€the€evidence€lies.€€òòWingert€v.€Government€of€Sumner€Countyóó,Ï908€S.W.2d€921,€922€(Tenn.€1995).Ìà àDefendant€contends€that€plaintiff€has€failed€to€prove€that€her€injury€wasÏcausally€connected€to€her€employment.€€ð ðExcept€in€the€most€obvious€and€routineÏcases,€the€claimant€in€a€workersðð€compensation€action€must€establish€causationÏby€expert€medical€evidence.ðð€€òòHill€v.€Eagle€Bend€Mfg.,€Inc.óó,€942€S.W.2d€483,€487Í(Tenn.€1997).€€Initially€Dr.€Holancin€stated€that€plaintiff€ð ðhas€been€off€of€work€forÏabout€a€month€and€has€had€no€improvement€which€doesnððt€favor€being€aÏrepetitive€motion€type€injury.ðð€€On€the€other€hand,€Dr.€Boals€stated€to€aÏreasonable€degree€of€medical€certainty€that€ð ðthe€causation€is€the€work€done€atÏTecumseh€Products€on€a€rather€heavy€production€line€for€ten€monthsðð€duration.ðð€ÏIt€is€well„settled€in€Tennessee€that€when€faced€with€conflicting€medicalÏtestimony,€a€trial€court€may,€in€its€discretion,€accept€the€opinion€of€one€medicalÏexpert€over€that€of€another.€€òòJohnson€v.€Midwesco,€Inc.óó,€801€S.W.2d€804,€806Ï(Tenn.€1990).€€It€is€apparent€that€the€trial€court€weighed€Dr.€Boalsðð€firmly€statedÏopinion€more€heavily€than€the€ambivalent€statement€of€Dr.€Holancin.€€This€issueÏis€without€merit.ÌÓÓÌà@ àò òII.€Temporary€Total€Disability.ó óÌÌÌÓÓà àNext,€defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€was€in€error€in€awardingÏtemporary€total€disability€benefits€from€April€25,€1996€through€August€30,€1996.€ÏIn€òòSimpson€v.€Satterfieldóó,€564€S.W.2d€953,€955€(Tenn.€1978),€our€supreme€courtÏhad€this€to€say€about€how€to€prove€temporary€total€disability:ÌÓÓÌà8 à[T]o€make€out€a€prima€facie€case€of€entitlement€to€temporary€totalÏdisability,€an€employee€must€prove€that€he€was€(1)€totally€disabledÏto€work€by€a€compensable€injury;€(2)€that€there€was€a€causalÏconnection€between€the€injury€and€his€inability€to€work;€and€(3)€theÏduration€of€that€period€of€disability.€€Temporary€total€disabilityÏbenefits€are€terminated€either€by€the€ability€to€return€to€work€orÏattainment€of€maximum€recovery.ÌÌÌÓÓThe€record€established€that€plaintiff€was€forced€to€leave€work€by€her€conditionÍon€April€24,€1996€and€there€is€nothing€to€contradict€the€opinion€of€Dr.€RowlandÏthat€she€had€reached€maximum€recovery€on€August€30,€1996.€€This€issue€is€alsoÏwithout€merit.ÌÓÓÌà@ àò òIII.€Permanent€Partial€Disability.ó óÌÌÌÓÓà àDefendant€contends€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trialÏcourtððs€findings€of€permanent€partial€disability€to€plaintiffððs€right€and€left€arms.€ÏDr.€Rowland€was€of€the€opinion€that€plaintiff€had€suffered€a€ten€percentÏpermanent€partial€disability€to€her€right€arm,€but€he€expressed€no€opinion€as€toÏher€left€arm.€€Dr.€Boals€attributed€thirty€percent€permanent€partial€disability€toÏboth€of€plaintiffððs€arms€in€his€first€examination,€but€reduced€the€permanent€partialÏdisability€in€plaintiffððs€right€arm€to€twenty€percent€in€his€second€examination,Ïreflecting€that€it€had€showed€some€improvement€following€plaintiffððs€surgery.ÌÓÓÌà8 àOnce€causation€and€permanency€have€been€established€by€expertÏmedical€testimony,€the€trial€judge€may€consider€many€pertinentÏfactors,€including€age,€job€skills,€education,€training,€duration€ofÏdisability,€anatomical€disabilities€established€by€medical€experts,Ïand€job€opportunities€available€to€a€worker€with€those€anatomicalÏdisabilities,€to€determine€the€extent€of€the€workerððs€industrialÏdisability.Ìà àòòHill€v.€Royal€Ins.€Co.óó,€937€S.W.2d€873,€877€(Tenn.€1996).ÌÌÌÓÓWe€find€nothing€in€the€record€to€indicate€that€the€trial€court€did€not€properlyÏconsider€all€the€pertinent€factors€in€regard€to€this€issue.€€The€evidence€does€notÏpreponderate€against€this€award€by€the€trial€court€as€to€either€arm.€€Ìà àAs€an€ancillary€matter€to€this€issue,€defendant€contends€that€plaintiff€inÍthis€case€was€not€a€credible€witness,€citing€several€inconsistencies€in€herÏtestimony€at€trial€as€compared€to€her€deposition€testimony.€€The€trial€courtÏspecifically€addressed€this€issue€in€its€findings.€€The€law€is€clear€that€ð ð[w]hereÏthe€trial€judge€has€seen€and€heard€witnesses,€especially€where€issues€ofÏcredibility€and€weight€of€oral€testimony€are€involved,€on€review€considerableÏdeference€must€still€be€accorded€to€those€circumstances.ðð€€òòClarendon€v.€BaptistÏMemððl€Hosp.óó,€796€S.W.2d€685,€689€(Tenn.€1990).€€This€issue€is€without€merit,€asÏwell.ÌÓÓÌà@ àò òIV.€Discretionary€Costs.ó óÌÌÌÓÓà àThe€trial€court€charged€against€defendant€as€the€employer€plaintiffððsÏmedical€expenses€relative€to€her€treatment€by€Dr.€Rowland€and€Jackson„Madison€County€General€Hospital,€as€well€as€mileage€in€traveling€to€and€fromÏher€home€to€Jackson.€€In€addition,€defendant€was€taxed€with€plaintiffððs€costsÏpertaining€to€the€taking€and€preparation€of€the€deposition€of€Dr.€Boals.€€T.C.A.€ððÏ50„6„204(a)(1)€provides€in€essence€that€the€injured€employees€medicalÏexpenses€will€be€paid€directly€to€the€health€care€provider€by€the€employer.€ÏWhere€medical€expenses€are€contested€and€the€employee€prevails,€theÏexpenses€are€a€part€of€the€award€of€benefits.€€òòòòSeeóóóó€òòLangford€v.€Liberty€MutualÏIns.€Co.,€Inc.óó,€854€S.W.2d€100€(Tenn.€1993).€€In€addition,€the€deposition€costsÏwere€properly€awarded€under€these€circumstances,€pursuant€to€both€statute€andÏcase€law.€€òòSeeòòóó€óóT.C.A.€ðð€50„6„226(c)(1)€(Supp.€1997),€òòMiles€v.€Marshall€C.€VossÏHealth€Care€Ctr.óó,€896€S.W.2d€773,€775€(Tenn.€1995).Ìà àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€in€this€cause€on€appealÏare€assessed€to€defendant,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÓÓÌÔ€/Ôà àà àà àà àà à€€€€€€€€€_____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà à€€€€€€€€€HEWITT€P.€TOMLIN,€JR.,€SENIOR€JUDGEÔ€0ÔÌÔ€/ÔÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_____________________________________ÌJANICE€M.€HOLDER,€JUSTICE€ÌÌÌÌ_____________________________________ÌCORNELIA€A.€CLARK,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÌÔ€0ÔÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÇÑ ` Ñà@ àÔ€0¼ÔIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àAT€JACKSONÔ€0XÔÌÌÌÓ#` p…XÈôÐ X#ÓJEANETTE€WILSON,à àà à)à àHENRY€CIRCUITÌÓ#` p` ÈôÐ X#Óà à)à àNO.€561ÌÓ#` p` ¸ ÈôÐ X#Óà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à à)à àÌà àà à)à àHon.€C.€Creed€McGinley,Ìvs.à àà à)à àJudgeÌà àà à)ÌTECUMSEH€PRODUCTS€COMPANY,à à)à àNO.€02S01„9704„CV„00031ÌßJ€35;+'b|ŠÝ` Å `€@ÿJßà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellant.à à)à àAFFIRMED.ÌÌÌÌà@ àÔ€0¼ÔJUDGMENT€ORDERÔ€0XÔÌÌÓ  ÓÓÓÌÓ` p`  ’XÓà àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€the€entire€record,€including€theÏorder€of€referral€to€the€Special€Workers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel,€and€theÏPanel's€Memorandum€Opinion€setting€forth€its€findings€of€fact€and€conclusionsÏof€law,€which€are€incorporated€herein€by€reference.Ìà àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€Memorandum€OpinionÏof€the€Panel€should€be€accepted€and€approved;€andÌà àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Panel's€findings€of€fact€andÏconclusions€of€law€are€adopted€and€affirmed,€and€the€decision€of€the€Panel€isÏmade€the€judgment€of€the€Court.Ìà àCosts€will€be€paid€by€Appellant,€and€surety,€for€which€executionÏmay€issue€if€necessary.Ìà àIT€IS€SO€ORDERED€this€7th€day€of€January,€1998.ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPER€CURIAMÌ(Holder,€J.,€not€participating)ÌÌÌÌ›