APPELLATE COURT OPINIONS | Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts

COURT

COUNTY

AUTHORING JUDGE

ORIGINATING JUDGE

CASE NUMBER

DATE FILTER

SEARCH TITLE

SEARCH CASE SUMMARY

Habeas Corpus Proceeding. See Haggard v. State, 475 S.W.2D 186, 187 (Tenn. Crim. 02C01-9610-CC-00345	Lake County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/22/96
State v. Roger Dale Hill, No. 01C01-9508-Cc-00267 (Tenn. Crim. App. June 20, 1996), 02C01-9610-CC-00338	Lake County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/22/96
MC-CH-CV-RE-03-15 MC-CH-CV-RE-03-15 Originating Judge:John H. Gasaway, III	Montgomery County	Court of Appeals	10/22/96
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX		Court of Appeals	10/21/96
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX	Hamilton County	Court of Appeals	10/21/96
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX		Court of Appeals	10/21/96
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX		Court of Appeals	10/21/96
03A01-9607-CV-00227 03A01-9607-CV-00227 Originating Judge:Inman		Court of Appeals	10/21/96
In April 1989. In The Present Appeal, The Petitioner, Relying In Part Upon State v. Roger 02C01-9610-CC-00333	Lake County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/21/96
State v. Roger Dale Hill, No. 01C01-9508-Cc-00267 (Tenn. Crim. App. June 20, 1996), 02C01-9610-CC-00335	Lake County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/21/96
01A01-9602-CV-00070 01A01-9602-CV-00070 Originating Judge:Thomas W. Brothers	Davidson County	Court of Appeals	10/18/96
01A01-9604-CH-00191 01A01-9604-CH-00191 Originating Judge:Ellen Hobbs Lyle	Davidson County	Court of Appeals	10/18/96
01A01-9604-CH-00149 01A01-9604-CH-00149 Originating Judge:Ellen Hobbs Lyle		Court of Appeals	10/18/96
Honorable Hamilton v. Gayden, Jr., Judge 01A01-9605-CV-00201 Originating Judge:Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.	Davidson County	Court of Appeals	10/18/96
01A01-9604-CH-00181 01A01-9604-CH-00181 Originating Judge:Gerald L. Ewell, Sr.	Coffee County	Court of Appeals	10/18/96
01A01-9603-PB-00093 01A01-9603-PB-00093 Originating Judge:James R. Everett	Davidson County	Court of Appeals	10/18/96
03C01-9512-CC-00381 03C01-9512-CC-00381	Sevier County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/18/96
State vs. John Wayne Slate 03C01-9511-CC-00352	Sevier County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/18/96
03C01-9506-CR-00169 03C01-9506-CR-00169 Originating Judge:James C. Witt	Campbell County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/18/96
State vs. John Wayne Slate 03C01-9511-CC-00352	Sevier County	Court of Criminal Appeals	10/18/96
Juanita D. Bean v. Royal Insurance Company and Ckr Industries, Inc. 01SO1-9505-CH-00071 This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special W orkers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with TENN. CODE ANN. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. Our review is de novo on the record accompanied by a presumption that the findings of fact of the trial court are correct unless the evidence preponderates otherwise. TENN. CODE ANN. _ 5-6-225(e)(2). The trial court awarded Ms. Bean $8,831.4 permanent partial disability benefits, representing forty-eight (48) weeks at the benefit rate of $183.98 per week, or twelve percent (12%) to the body as a whole; future medical expenses pursuant to the Tennessee Workers' Compensation Act; and reasonable costs of Dr. Rodriguez services. The trial court also allowed attorneys fees of twenty percent (2%) of the award, in the amount of $1,766.21, to be paid in lump sum. The appellant contends that the trial court erred in: 1. Finding that a vocational disability based upon a permanent medical restriction, with medical testimony of no medical impairment rating in accordance with the A.M.A. Guidelines for Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, constitutes a compensable permanent partial disability under the Workers' Compensation Act. 2. Awarding permanent partial disability benefits to the Plaintiff that were excessive and against the weight of the evidence. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. Ms. Bean filed her complaint in the Chancery Court for Franklin County, Tennessee, against her employer, Defendant CKR Industries, seeking to recover unpaid benefits under the Tennessee Workers' Compensation Act for work-related injuries. Ms. Bean alleged that she suffered injuries as a result of exposure to chemicals in use at the CKR Plant. The case was consolidated with three (3) other cases for trial due to significant similarities in the cases. The opinion of the Court on the first issue is contained in the case of Angela K. Hill v. Royal Insurance Company and CKR Industries, Inc., No. 1S1-955-CH-71, filed simultaneously with this opinion. The Court held that the trial court did not err in finding that a vocational disability existed based upon the testimony of the medical experts that a permanent medical restriction existed which constitutes a permanent partial disability under the W orker's Compensation Act, even though no medical impairment rating was given by any of the Authoring Judge: Robert L. Childers, Special Judge Originating Judge:Hon. Jeffrey F. Stewart	Franklin County	Workers Compensation Panel	10/17/96
Ralph D. West v. Sonic Drive-In and Anco Interstate Insurance Company 01S01-9603-CH-00054 This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The plaintiff alleged that he injured his back on November 27, 1991 while employed as a cook. He sought medical treatment about one month later and in course was referred to Dr. Fonda Bondurant, an orthopedic surgeon in Lebanon, Tennessee, who performed a hemilaminectomy and discectomy on January 27, 1992. The surgery was successful, and the plaintiff was released to return to work on March 31, 1992. Utilizing the AMA Guidelines, Dr. Bondurant gave the plaintiff an impairment rating of eight percent "strictly because he had surgical intervention performed." This case has been twice tried. The first trial was held on April 19, 1993 and ended with a non-suit after the plaintiff and his wife testified. The second trial was held on October 4, 1994 resulting in a finding that the plaintiff had a 32 percent vocational impairment. The defendant appeals and presents for review the issues of notice, occurrence, injury and disability. An issue involving the admission of certain Social Security records is also presented. Our review is de novo on the record, accompanied with the presumption that the findings of fact of the trial court are correct unless the evidence otherwise preponderates. T.C.A. _ 5-6-225(e)(2). At the outset, we are constrained to observe that this 38-year-old man has testified three times; once upon discovery and twice in open court. His testimony is inconsistent and obviously underwent considerable fine-tuning during the interim between trials. The Chancellor expressed his dissatisfaction with certain aspects of the case, but in the end resolved the issues of notice and injury favorably to the plaintiff, chiefly because a reputable orthopedic surgeon took a history from the plaintiff two months after the injury and performed major corrective surgery on him. In any event the Chancellor is the best judge of the credibility of the plaintiff and we 2 Authoring Judge: William H. Inman, Senior Judge Originating Judge:Hon. C.K. Smith,	Smith County	Workers Compensation Panel	10/17/96
Shirley Diane Trail v. Royal Insurance Company and Ckr Industries, Inc., 01SO1-9505-CH-00071 This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with TENN. CODE ANN. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. Our review is de novo on the record accompanied by the presumption that the findings of fact of the trial court are correct unless the evidence preponderates otherwise. TENN. CODE ANN. _ 5-6-225(e)(2). The trial court awarded Ms. Trail $19,421. permanent partial disability benefits, representing one-hundreed (1) weeks at the benefit rate of $194.21 per week, or twenty-five percent (25%) to the body as a whole; and future medical benefits pursuant to the Tennessee Workers' Compensation Act. The trial court also allowed attorneys fees of twenty percent (2%) of the award, in the amount of $3,884.2, to be paid in a lump sum. The Appellant contends that the trial court erred in: 1. Finding that a vocational disability based upon a permanent medical restriction, with medical testimony of no medical impairment rating in accordance with the A.M.A. Guidelines for Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, constitutes a compensable permanent partial disability under the Workers' Compensation Act. 2. Awarding permanent partial disability benefits to the Plaintiff that were excessive and against the weight of the evidence. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. Ms. Trail filed her complaint in the Chancery Court for Franklin County, Tennessee, against her employer, Defendant CKR Industries, seeking to recover unpaid benefits under the Tennessee Workers' Compensation Act for work-related injuries. Ms. Trail alleged that she suffered injuries as a result of exposure to chemicals in use at the CKR Plant. The case was consolidated with three (3) other cases for trial due to significant similarities in the cases. The opinion of the Court on the first issue is contained in the case of Angela K. Hill v. Royal Insurance Company and CKR Industries, Inc., No. 1S1-955-CH-71, filed simultaneously with this opinion. The Court held that the trial court did not err in finding that a vocational disability existed based upon the testimony of the medical experts that a permanent medical restriction existed which constitutes a permanent partial disability under the Worker's Compensation Act, even though no medical impairment rating was given by any of the Authoring Judge: Robert L. Childers, Special Judge Originating Judge:Hon. Jeffrey F. Stewart	Franklin County	Workers Compensation Panel	10/17/96
Kerry Alan Napier v. Cincinnati Casualty Insurance Company and North Central Telephone Cooperative 01S01-9604-CH-00063 This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The issue in this case is whether the award of 75 percent disability to the plaintiff's right hand is in accord with the preponderance of proof. Appellate review is confined to a review de novo on the record, accompanied by a presumption that the trial judge's findings of fact are correct unless the evidence otherwise preponderates. T.C.A. _ 5-6-225(e)(2). A concomitant rule is that we are as enabled as the trial judge to judge the probative worth of depositional testimony. Landers v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Co., 775 S.W.2d 355, 356 (Tenn. 1989). The plaintiff's job with the telephone company was that of a cable splicer and repairman. During the course of his employment, he sustained a laceration to the extensor tendon of his right hand, on October 25, 1994, involving the index, middle and ring fingers, which was repaired by Dr. Keith Morrison, an orthopedic surgeon in Bowling Green, Kentucky, under whose care he remained until February 22, 1995. On that date, Dr. Morrison noted: Mr. Napier is now 4 months status post extensor tendon repair on his right hand. Four tendons repaired to the index finger, slips to the middle and ring finger on the right hand. His EXAM today shows some improvement. He still lacks full extension on the index finger by about 2dg when his wrist is brought into extension. With the wrist in the flexed position, he has full extension of the hand. He has full flexion of all the digits with his only limitation being the lack of full extension on the index finger with his wrist in the above mentioned extension position. They would like to get a second opinion for insurance reasons so we are going to see him back in 1 month. At that time he will be 5 months out. I recommend tenolysis exploration. If he is still dissatisfied with the result. Overall, he has made a big improvement, having had no active extension of the fingers on repair. He remains neurovascularly intact. Otherwise, no loss of sensation. The plaintiff was later seen, on March 15, 1995 by Dr. Stephen Pratt, a specialist in reconstructive hand surgery, because of a 3 degree lag in the index finger. Further tendon repairs were undertaken to correct the lag. Dr. Pratt testified 2 Authoring Judge: William H. Inman, Senior Judge Originating Judge:Hon. C.K. Smith,	Macon County	Workers Compensation Panel	10/17/96
Barbara Ann Holt v. Royal Insurance Company and Ckr Industries, Inc. 01SO1-9505-CH-00071 This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special W orkers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with TENN. CODE ANN. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. Our review is de novo on the record accompanied by a presumption that the findings of fact of the trial court are correct unless the evidence preponderates otherwise. TENN. CODE ANN. _ 5-6-225(e)(2). The trial court awarded Ms. Holt $13,196.8 permanent partial disability benefits, representing eighty (8) weeks at the benefit rate of $164.96 per week, or twenty percent (2%) to the body as a whole; and future medical benefits pursuant to the Tennessee Workers' Compensation Act. The trial court also allowed attorneys fees of twenty percent (2%) of the award, in the amount of $2,639.36, to be paid in lump sum. The appellant contends that the trial court erred in: 1. Finding that a vocational disability based upon a permanent medical restriction, with medical testimony of no medical impairment rating in accordance with A.M.A. Guidelines for Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, constitutes a compensable permanent partial disability under the Workers' Compensation Act. 2. Awarding permanent partial disability benefits to the Plaintiff that were excessive and against the weight of the evidence. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. Ms. Holt filed her complaint in the Chancery Court for Franklin County, Tennessee, against her employer, Defendant CKR Industries, seeking to recover unpaid benefits under the Tennessee Workers' Compensation Act for work-related injuries. Ms. Holt alleged that she suffered injuries as a result of exposure to chemicals in use at the CKR Plant. The case was consolidated with three (3) other cases for trial due to significant similarities in the cases. The opinion of the Court on the first issue is contained in the case of Angela K. Hill v. Royal Insurance Company and CKR Industries, Inc., No. 1S1-955-CH-71, filed simultaneously with this opinion. The Court held that the trial court did not err in finding that a vocational disability existed based upon the testimony of the medical experts that a permanent medical restriction existed which constitutes a permanent partial disability under the Worker's Compensation Act, even though no medical impairment rating was given by any of the medical experts. Authoring Judge: Robert L. Childers, Special Judge Originating Judge:Hon. Jeffrey F. Stewart	Franklin County	Workers Compensation Panel	10/17/96