ÿWPC 2# ÌUN× %% 0(+4Sgvw@~ 0J¾ 0T 0^\ 0hº 0r" 0|” 0† 0– 1u& 0d›U>ÿ AQ= ÆŽ 0DT 0@˜ 0DØ B) D/E Bt B‘ D3® DCá U*$ AMN ý› U6˜ ýÎ v~ËvÓI˜HP LaserJet 4 PlusHPPCL5MS,ð,,,,,ð0nLHÎ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡§ƒt!3|xÎ ÅÆEÇEÈ™ÉÊDËÓ€ÌUÍ îÎD2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman!"#$&Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó% Line 7 d(('÷ÿ dxd düÿP Pd'''''ÿÿdxd%%%%7Border 1dd< Œ 9p`(Arial!#*Cþÿ << Gÿÿ óÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€+ÔÔ€+ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€+XÔÌÌNovember€25,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó< Œ 9p`(Courier New óÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ""ÝÝ  ÝÔ€+ÔÔ€+ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€+XÔÌÌNovember€25,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó óPtPtfHHÚ(ÿáÿáùE1À˜ýHHŽxЀxh'dHStyl{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  inion Geneva ÒÒ  inion Geneva ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÑ  ÑÒ ø ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ø ÒÒ Ð Òò òÑ\R AØ'\ÑÙ€!ÙÙ€!ÙÓ  ÓÔ€+ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑßR€,-*A1-j|` ç `€€@ÿRßÞ ÞÌIN›€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌSPECIAL€WORKERS'€COMPENSATION€PANELÌAT€NASHVILLEÌÓ  Óó óÌÌÌÌWILLIAM€O.€WORLEY,€JR.,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àSEQUATCHIE€CIRCUITÌà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà àà à)à àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNO.€01S01„9509„CV„00160Ìv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à à(No.€Below€œ6411)›Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌTECUMSEH€PRODUCTS€COMPANY,à à)à àHON.€BUDDY€D.€PERRY,Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àJUDGEÌà àDefendant/Appellant.à àà à)à àÌÌÌÌÌòòò òFor€the€Appellant:à àà àà àà àà àFor€the€Appellee:ó óóóÌÌLester€Austinà àà àà àà àà àStephen€GreerÌKeith€Davisà àà àà àà àà àà àP.€O.€Box€758ÌP.€O.€Box€666à àà àà àà àà àDunlap,€Tennessee€37327ÌDunlap,€Tennessee€37327à àà àà à(423)€949„3621Ì(423)€949„4159ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌòòò òÓ  ÓMEMORANDUM€OPINIONó óóóÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌòòò òMembers€of€Panel:ó óóóÌJustice€Frank€F.€Drowota,€IIIÌSenior€Judge€John€K.€ByersÌSpecial€Judge€Robert€L.€ChildersÌÓ  ÓÌÌÌÌÌò òAFFIRMED€as€MODIFIED€AND€REMANDED.à àà àCHILDERS,ÏSpecial€Judgeó óÇÓÓÓ  Óà àThis€workers'€compensation€appeal€has€been€referred€to€the€SpecialÏWorkers'€Compensation€Appeals€Panel€of€the€Supreme€Court€in€accordance€withÏTòòenn.óó€Còòodeóó€Aòònnóó.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(3)€for€hearing€and€reporting€to€the€Supreme€CourtÏof€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law.Ìà àIn€this€case,€the€trial€court€awarded€45%€permanent€partial€disability€to€theÏright€arm.€€Defendant€contends€that€the€evidence€does€not€support€the€percentageÏof€disability€awarded€and€requests€that€this€court€reduce€and€amend€the€judgmentÏof€the€trial€court€accordingly.€€The€Defendant€also€contends€that€the€trial€court€erredÏin€accrediting€the€testimony€of€Plaintiff's€expert€witness€over€the€testimony€of€theÏtreating€physician.€€The€final€issue€is€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€awardingÏdiscretionary€costs€for€the€deposition€of€Plaintiff's€expert€medical€witness.€€TheÏDefendant€also€raises€the€issue€of€whether€the€trial€court€erred€in€awarding€a€lumpÏsum.€€As€the€benefits€have€now€accrued,€this€issue€is€moot.Ìà àOn€June€19,€1992,€Plaintiff€injured€his€right€arm€and€wrist€while€working€onÏa€machine.€€Plaintiff€is€48€years€old€and€has€a€high€school€education.€€His€workÏexperience€consists€of€working€in€the€parts€department,€as€a€mechanic,€as€a€toolÏand€die€worker,€on€a€surveying€crew,€as€a€fire€fighter,€as€a€guard,€and€as€a€€waterÏpipeline€repairer.€€Each€of€these€jobs€required€heavy€manual€labor€and€the€use€ofÏPlaintiff's€arms€and€hands.€€Plaintiff€had€been€employed€at€Tecumseh€forÏapproximately€a€year€and€a€half€when€he€sustained€the€injury.Ìà àDr.€L.€L.€Carter,€Jr.€treated€the€Plaintiff€after€he€was€injured.€€Dr.€Carter€firstÏexamined€Plaintiff€on€July€7,€1992.€€Dr.€Carter€testified,€by€deposition,€that€theÏnerve€conduction€tests€showed€elbow€nerve€and€wrist€nerve€damage.€€Initially,€Dr.ÍCarter€treated€this€condition€conservatively,€with€a€wrist€splint,€with€noÏimprovement.€€On€August€31,€1992,€Dr.€Carter€performed€ulnar€nerveÏdecompression€and€submuscular€transposition.€At€the€same€time,€carpal€tunnelÏrelease€in€the€right€hand€and€a€nerve€graft€to€the€neuroma€on€the€right€wrist€wereÏperformed.€€Three€days€later,€Plaintiff€was€told€to€return€to€light€work.€€Plaintiff€wasÏreturned€to€regular€work€on€December€15,€1992.Ìà àDr.€Carter€did€not€see€Plaintiff€again€until€January€8,€1993,€at€the€request€ofÏPlaintiff's€employer.€€At€that€time,€Dr.€Carter€informed€Plaintiff€that€he€could€return€toÏwork€with€no€restrictions.Ìà àDr.€Carter€saw€Plaintiff€again€in€April€1993€at€which€time€he€learned€thatÏanother€physician,€Dr.€Karen€Shepherd,€had€restricted€Plaintiff€from€working€due€toÏdelayed€stress€syndrome.€€Dr.€Carter€assumed€that€this€delayed€stress€syndromeÏwas€related€to€the€death€of€Plaintiff's€wife.€€Plaintiff€continued€to€complain€of€pain,Ïwhich€Dr.€Carter€opined€was€not€credibly€related€to€the€prior€surgery.Ìà àAn€impairment€rating€test€was€performed€on€May€17,€1993€at€ChattanoogaÏRehabilitation€Center.€€The€results€of€the€test€indicated€a€possible€lack€of€maximumÏeffort€and€elicited€AMA€Guides€impairment€rating€of€8%€to€the€body€as€a€whole.€ÏPlaintiff€was€retested€and€was€given€an€impairment€rating€of€3%.Ìà àDr.€C.€Sanford€Carlson,€Jr.€saw€Plaintiff€on€October€26,€1993,€for€a€secondÏopinion€as€requested€by€Plaintiff's€attorney.€€Dr.€Carlson€opined€that€a€naturalÏconsequence€of€the€surgery€performed€by€Dr.€Carter€is€weakness€of€grip€and€œthatÏin€fact€Plaintiff€had€suffered€from€that€consequence€of€the€surgery.›€€Plaintiff€madeÏgood€effort€on€the€dynamometer€testing€and€revealed€33%€loss€of€grip€strength.€ÍDr.€Carlson€assessed€15„17%€impairment€of€the€right€upper€extremity€by€AMAÏGuides.€€Dr.€Carlson's€assessment€was€based€primarily€on€the€three€surgicalÏprocedures€that€Plaintiff€had€undergone,€the€fact€that€the€muscles€that€controlledÏgrip€strength€were€affected€by€the€surgery€and€the€œEMG›€results.€€Dr.€CarlsonÏrestricted€Plaintiff's€activities,€including€limiting€any€extensive€repetitive€grippingÏand€squeezing,€pushing€and€pulling,€and€using€vibratory€tools€on€the€assemblyÏline.Ìà àAfter€considering€all€of€the€proof€presented€at€trial,€the€trial€court€awardedÏ45%€permanent,€partial€industrial€impairment€to€the€right€arm.€€€Ìà àWhen€the€opinions€of€medical€experts€differ€in€a€workers'€compensationÏcase,€the€trial€court€has€absolute€discretion€to€accept€the€opinion€of€one€medicalÏexpert€over€another.€€òòJohnson€v.€Midwesco,€Inc.óó,€801€S.W.2d€804€(Tenn.€1990).€ÏThe€fact€that€one€of€the€medical€experts€was€a€treating€physician€while€the€otherÏwas€Plaintiff's€expert€medical€witness€is€one€of€the€factors€that€can€be€consideredÏby€the€court€in€accepting€one€opinion€over€the€other.€€òòElmore€v.€Travelers€Ins.€Co.óó,Ï824€S.W.2d€541€(Tenn.€1992).Ìà àIn€€determining€whether€there€has€been€a€decrease€in€the€employee'sÏcapacity€to€earn€wages€in€any€line€of€work€available€to€the€employee€andÏassigning€permanent€partial€disability,€the€trial€court€should€consider€both€expertÏand€lay€testimony,€as€well€as€the€employee's€age,€education,€skills,€training,€localÏjob€opportunities,€and€capacity€to€work€at€types€of€employment€available€inÏclaimant's€disabled€condition.€€òòOrman€v.€Williams„Sonoma,€Inc.óó,€803€S.W.2d€672,Ï678€(Tenn.€1991).€€Our€review€is€òòde€novoóó€on€the€record€accompanied€by€aÍpresumption€that€the€findings€of€fact€made€by€the€trial€court€are€correct€unless€theÏevidence€preponderates€otherwise.€€Tòòenn.€óóCòòodeóó€Aòònn.óó€ðð€50„6„225(e).€€The€recordÏbeing€unclear€as€to€what€factors€the€trial€judge€considered€in€assessing€45%Ïdisability€to€the€right€arm,€we€find€that€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€againstÏsuch€a€finding.Ìà àThe€Defendant€also€challenges€the€trial€court's€award€of€discretionary€costsÏin€the€amount€of€$600.00€for€Plaintiff's€medical€expert's€fee€and€$142.00€for€theÏexpenses€of€the€court€reporter€to€take€the€deposition€of€Plaintiff's€medical€expert.€ÏAs€to€the€Plaintiff's€medical€expert's€fee,€the€fees€charged€to€the€Plaintiff€by€theÏphysician€"shall,€unless€the€interests€of€justice€require€otherwise,€be€considered€aÏpart€of€the€costs€of€the€case,€to€be€charged€against€the€employer€when€theÏemployee€is€the€prevailing€party."€€Tòòennóó.€Còòodeóó€Aòònn.óó€ðð€50„6„226(c)(1).€€€We€do€notÏbelieve€that€this€is€a€case€where€the€interests€of€justice€require€deviation€from€theÏgeneral€rule.€€As€to€the€court€reporter€expenses,€Plaintiff€concedes€that€the€properÏmeans€of€recovering€this€would€have€been€to€file€a€Motion€for€Discretionary€CostsÏpursuant€to€Tennessee€Rule€of€Civil€Procedure€54.€€No€such€motion€was€filed.€€AsÏsuch,€the€discretionary€costs€are€modified€by€$142.00.€Ìà àWe€find€that€the€evidence€in€the€record€does€not€preponderate€against€theÏtrial€court's€finding€that€the€plaintiff€suffered€a€45%€permanent€partial€disability€toÏthe€right€arm.€Therefore,€the€€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Costs€areÏassessed€to€Defendants/Appellants.€€We€remand€the€case€to€the€trial€court€for€theÏentry€of€any€order€necessary€to€carry€out€this€judgment.à àà àà àà àà àà àÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àœ__________________________________›Ìà àà àà àà àà àœ€€€€€€€€€€€Robert›€L.€Childers,€Special€JudgeÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ________________________________ÌFrank€F.€Drowota,€III,€JusticeÌÌ________________________________ÌJohn€K.€Byers,€Senior€œJudgeÌÌÇšÔ€.Ôà@ àIN€THE€SUPREME€COURT€OF€TENNESSEEÌßJ€,/;+'b|E9` ç `€@ÿJßÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLEÌÌÌWILLIAM€O.€WORLEY,€JR.,à àà à)€€SEQUATCHIE€CIRCUITÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)€€NO.€€6411Ìà àPlaintiff/Appellee,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)€€Hon.€Buddy€D.€PerryÌV.à àà àà àà àà àà à)€€JudgeÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌTECUMSEH€PRODUCTS€COMPANY,à à)€€S.Ct.€No.€01„S„01„9509„CV„00160Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àDefendant/Appellant.à à)€€Affirmed€as€Modified€and€à àà àà àà àà àà àà à€€ÏRemandedÌÌÌÌà@ àòòJUDGMENT€ORDERóóÌÌÌÓ€Óà àà àThis€case€is€before€the€Court€upon€motion€for€reviewÏpursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€50„6„225(e)(5)(B),€the€entireÏrecord,€including€the€order€of€referral€to€the€Special€Workers'ÏCompensation€Appeals€Panel,€and€the€Panel's€Memorandum€OpinionÏsetting€forth€its€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law,Ïwhich€are€incorporated€herein€by€reference;ÌÌà àà àWhereupon,€it€appears€to€the€Court€that€the€motionÏfor€review€is€not€well„taken€and€should€be€denied;€andÌÌà àà àIt€is,€therefore,€ordered€that€the€Panel's€findingsÏof€fact€and€conclusions€of€law€are€adopted€and€affirmed,€andÏthe€decision€of€the€Panel€is€made€the€judgment€of€the€Court.ÌÌà àà àCost€will€be€paid€by€Defendant/Appellant,€and€theirÏsurety,€for€which€execution€may€issue€if€necessary.ÌÌà àà àIt€is€so€ordered€this€25th€day€of€November,€1996.ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPER€CURIAMÌÔ€+Ô›