 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Gregory v. American Manufacturers Mutual Ins.6/1/2000
ORDER
This case is before the Court upon motion for review pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. ยง 50-6-225(e)(5)(B), the entire record, including the order of referral to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel, and the Panel's Memorandum Opinion setting forth its findings of fact and conclusions of law, which are incorporated herein by reference;
Whereupon, it appears to the Court that the motion for review is not well-taken and should be denied; and
It is, therefore, ordered that the Panel's findings of fact and conclusions of law are adopted and affirmed, and the decision of the Panel is made the judgment of the Court.
Costs on appeal are taxed to the appellant.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 1st day of June, 2000.
AFFIRMED
Hamilton V. Gayden, Special Judge
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. Sec. 50-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law.
The Plaintiff/Appellee filed suit in the Chancery Court for Sumner County for workers' compensation benefits; on the same date, the Defendant/Appellant filed a complaint to determine the Plaintiff's entitlement to benefits in the Circuit Court for Sumner County. The two cases were consolidated in the Chancery Court. After a bench trial the Chancellor awarded the Plaintiff temporary disability benefits, permanent partial benefits and discretionary costs.
The dispositive issue presented to this Panel is whether the Chancellor erred in finding that the Plaintiff proved by a preponderance of the evidence that he had suffered an injury to his back in the course and scope of his employment on January 2, 1997. It is the position of the employer that the Plaintiff's case fails due to lack of credibility given the conflicts in the testimony and the Chancellor's specific finding that the Plaintiff was not credible.
This suit arises out of an alleged back injury the Plaintiff states occurred on his job with Fleetwood Enterprises, Inc. on January 2, 1997. The only evidence and testimony that tends to corroborate the Plaintiff's version of the January 2, 1997 is his own testimony, the testimony of his wife and the testimony by way of deposition of two medical providers for Plaintiff Gregory, the latter physicians causally relating the disputed back injury to the job based only on the history given to them by the Plaintiff. On the other hand, the employer presented several witnesses who contradicted or disputed Plaintiff's version of reporting the particular injury in question to his superiors or the health providers of the employer.
The Chancellor made a finding of fact that the Plaintiff had been impeached. The Chancellor found that the Plaintiff's wife had been untruthful. The Chancellor also held that the witnesses for the employer were credible. Notwithstanding the critical analysis of Plaintiff's proof by the Chancellor, he held there was sufficient evidence to prove that the Plaintiff was injured on the job and that he reported his injury to the employer or that the employer knew of the injury.
The Plaintiff worked as an exterior assembler for Fleetwood Enterprises. Plaintiff testified that on January 2, 1997, he injured his left shoulder and back in the course of his employment while lifting a door. However, he only reported the shoulder injury to his supervisor, Keith Hammock, and was subsequently referred to Linda Mowell, who supervised Fleetwood's workers' compensation. The Plaintiff employee w
Page 1 2 3 4 Tennessee Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|