 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Hall v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store3/13/2001
Mailed - February 8, 2001
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated § 50-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The plaintiff brought this workers' compensation claim in which he alleges a drawer fell on his foot while he was working for the defendant. The trial judge found the plaintiff failed to show an injury by accident arising in the scope and course of his employment and dismissed the case. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court is Affirmed
John K. Byers, Sr. J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which William M. Barker, J. and Joseph M. Tipton, J., joined.
OPINION
Review of the findings of fact made by the trial court is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of the correctness of the findings, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-225(e)(2). Stone v. City of McMinnville, 896 S.W.2d 548, 550 (Tenn. 1995). The application of this standard requires this Court to weigh in more depth the factual findings and conclusions of the trial courts in workers' compensation cases. See Corcoran v. Foster Auto GMC, Inc., 746 S.W.2d 452, 456 (Tenn. 1988).
Facts
We have few facts to set out in this case because the trial judge found the plaintiff failed to prove his allegation that a drawer, which fell on his foot on October 16, 1995, caused him personal injury .
Medical Evidence
Considerable medical evidence exists in the record by way of a deposition and records. It appears the plaintiff has a problem with his left foot and his right foot. Unlike most cases, however, we see no need to set out in detail the medical evidence because, as noted by the trial judge, the validity of the medical evidence in relation to the plaintiff's work-related injury depends upon the plaintiff's credibility in reporting the history of injury to a physician. The trial judge's finding regarding the plaintiff's lack of credibility renders the medical information insignificant for purposes of our finding. The findings of the trial court, in pertinent part, are set out below:
In this case the court does not find that the employee
has met his burden of proof. There are too many inconsistencies and unanswered questions to make Mr. Hall's story credible. One, I would have thought that Mr. Hall would have remembered the name of the manager who was within ten (10) feet of him at the time the alleged incident occurred. Evidently this person was not deposed or otherwise identified. Two, if the drawer (which weighed between 30 and 66 pounds, the weight varied [according to] with whom Mr. Hall was talking) had fell on Mr. Hall's foot as described, one wonders how he could have stayed at work. Immediate medical attention would have been required. Three, there is no medical record that Mr. Hall testified he told anyone at East Ridge Hospital on 10/18/95 that a drawer had fallen on his foot even though Mr. Hall said he told the doctor on both occasions. Four, it appears inconsistent for Mr. Hall to open this drawer to get product for Steve, as Mr. Hall testified, if the drawer had only ice, fish and steak. Five, one would expect that a drawer, weighing 30 to 66 pounds, would have made some injury to Mr. Hall's foot or toes that would have been revealed by an x-ray. One would have thought that some bone would have been broken. All x-rays were normal. Six, D
Page 1 2 3 Tennessee Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|