 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Wardlaw v. Standard Coffee Service Co.9/3/1999
d disk.
When questioned as to the cause of the plaintiff injuries, Dr. Olinger, the only medical expert to testify in this case, opined, "He didn't have leg pain before. He started that day, and you know, he didn't have one specific injury where he bent down and popped and that was it and you know, you can pinpoint it. But obviously, as he was going through his activity during the day, his leg pain came on. You don't have anything else to attribute it to."
CONCLUSION
The trial court found by a preponderance of the evidence that the plaintiff's injury arose out of and in the course of employment and, thus, was compensable. We agree. The fact remains that the plaintiff was injured on the job , and the compensability of his injury is clear in this record.
The plaintiff attempts to raise an additional issue for the first time on appeal. He contends that the defendants are estopped from appealing the trial court's judgment, because they failed to file a notice of controversy with the Director of the Workers' Compensation Division as required by Tennessee Code Annotated § 50-6-205(d)(1) and, therefore, cannot now contest liability. This issue should have been raised in the trial court, and there is nothing in the record showing that the plaintiff did so. The issue is waived on appeal. See, e.g., Duckworth v. Globe Business Furniture, Inc., 806 S.W.2d 526 (Tenn. 1991); Tenn. R. Civ. P. 8.03; Tenn. R. App. P. 36(a).
The trial court's judgment is affirmed. Costs are assessed against the defendants/appellants.
L. T. LAFFERTY, SENIOR JUDGE
CONCUR:
JANICE M. HOLDER, JUSTICE
J. STEVEN STAFFORD, SPECIAL JUDGE
JUDGMENT
This case is before the Court upon motion for review pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 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 will be paid by the appellants, for which execution may issue if necessary.
It is so ordered.
PER CURIAM
HOLDER, J. NOT PARTICIPATING
|