 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Webb v. Shoe City9/20/2000
he results showed abnormal facet degenerative changes where the two disks had been removed. Dr. McGee stated that this condition could easily be a progression of the plaintiff's pre-existing arthritis; however, it was his opinion on April 11, 1996, that she was permanently and totally (100 percent) disabled, due to the facet changes and the pain. He did not refer to the AMA Guides in making this assessment. The doctor was unable to testify as to what percentage of the plaintiff's impairment was related to the accident at work or to what degree the accident caused the pre-existing condition. He stated, however, that the plaintiff's arthritis in the lumbar spine may have been aggravated by lifting boxes or the surgery, since "any trauma can aggravate arthritis."
The plaintiff's lawyer sent her to Dr. Samir R. Dawoud, an orthopedic surgeon, for an evaluation on December 18, 1997. The plaintiff's chief complaints were low back pain and right leg numbness and cramps. Dr. Dawoud conducted a neurological examination, x-rayed the plaintiff's lower spine, and reviewed a report that compared an MRI performed in January of 1998 with the one done on March 12, 1996. The report found unchanged findings at L3-4 and 5-6 where the surgery was performed and no new disk herniations. Degenerative disk disease at L4-5 had slightly increased and a slight increase in the spondylolisthesis. Bilateral L3-4, L4-5, and left L5-S1 facet disease was unchanged over almost two years between the MRIs. It was Dr. Dawoud's opinion that the plaintiff had a permanent partial disability due to lumbosacral disk disease, osteoarthritis, and surgery. Using page 3-113 of the AMA Guides, he rated the plaintiff with a 15 percent disability to the body as a whole. Dr. Dawoud broke this rating down into 10 percent for the lumbar disk disease and 5 percent for the spondylolisthesis and arthritis together. He also restricted the plaintiff from lifting more than fifty (50) pounds, spinal bending, stooping, kneeling, climbing ladders or multiple stairs, or working in extreme temperatures. It was Dr. Dawoud's opinion that the plaintiff's surgery and injury could have aggravated the osteoarthritic process.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The standard of review of factual issues in workers' compensation cases is de novo upon the record of the trial court with a presumption of correctness, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. Tenn. Code Ann. ยง50-6-225(e)(2) (1991 & Supp. 1998); Henson v. City of Lawrenceburg, 851 S.W.2d 809, 812 (Tenn. 1993). Under this standard, we are required to conduct an in-depth examination of the trial court's findings of fact and conclusions of law to determine where the preponderance of the evidence lies. See Thomas v. Aetna Life & Cas. Co., 812 S.W.2d 278, 282 (Tenn. 1991) In making such a determination, this Court must give considerable deference to the trial judge's findings regarding the weight and credibility of any oral testimony received. Townsend v. State, 826 S.W.2d 434, 437 (Tenn. 1992); Thomas, 812 S.W.2d at 283. However, when the determination of factual issues involves medical testimony derived solely from depositions, so all impressions regarding weight and credibility must be drawn from the contents of the documents, rather than an evaluation of live witnesses. Thomas, 812 S.W.2d at 283. Therefore, this Court may draw its own conclusions about the weight, credibility, and significance of such testimony. Seiber v. Greenbrier Indus., Inc., 906 S.W.2d 444, 446 (Tenn. 1995). With these principles in mind, we turn to the issues at hand.
PLAINTIFF'S MEANINGFUL RETURN TO WORK
The defendants argue that Shoe City made a reasonable attempt to return the plaintiff to
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Tennessee Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|