 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Tefft v. Weakley County Ambulance Service11/15/2002
The employee or claimant, Ms. Tefft, initiated this civil action to recover workers' compensation benefits, as provided by Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-101 et seq, for injuries allegedly suffered in a work related accident on September 13, 1999. Following a trial on August 9, 2001, the trial court awarded to her, among other things, permanent partial disability benefits based on 35 percent to the body as a whole. The employer, Weakley County Ambulance Service, has appealed.
For injuries occurring on or after July 1, 1985, appellate review is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of correctness of the findings of fact, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-225(e)(2) (2001 Supp.). The reviewing court is required to conduct an independent examination of the record to determine where the preponderance of the evidence lies. Wingert v. Government of Sumner County, 908 S.W.2d 921, 922 (Tenn. 1995). The standard governing appellate review of findings of fact by a trial court requires the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel to examine in depth a trial court's factual findings and conclusions. GAF Bldg. Materials v. George, 47 S.W.3d 430, 432 (Tenn. 2001). Where the trial judge has seen and heard the witnesses, especially if issues of credibility and weight to be given oral testimony are involved, considerable deference must be accorded those circumstances on review, because it is the trial court which had the opportunity to observe the witnesses' demeanor and to hear the in-court testimony. Long v. Tri-Con Ind., Ltd., 996 S.W.2d 173, 178 (Tenn. 1999). The trial court's findings with respect to credibility and weight of the evidence may generally be inferred from the manner in which the court resolves conflicts in the testimony and decides the case. Tobitt v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., 59 S.W.3d 57, 61 (Tenn. 2001). The appellate tribunal, however, is as well situated to gauge the weight, worth and significance of deposition testimony as the trial judge. Walker v. Saturn Corp., 986 S.W.2d 204, 207 (Tenn. 1998). The extent of an injured worker 's vocational disability is a question of fact. Seals v. England/Corsair Upholstery Mfg., 984 S.W.2d 912, 915 (Tenn. 1999). Where the medical testimony in a workers' compensation case is presented by deposition, the reviewing court may make an independent assessment of the medical proof to determine where the preponderance of the proof lies. Whirlpool Corp. v. Nakhoneinh, 69 S.W.3d 164, 167 (Tenn. 2002).
The claimant worked for the employer as an emergency medical technician. On the date of the injury, she and her partner/supervisor, Joe David Laws, responded to an emergency call issued because R. C. Lamb, a 5'11" 240 pound man, had fallen. The claimant claims she felt a pull in her lower back during the process of lifting the patient onto a stretcher. A couple of days later, she verbally reported the injury to Laws. She continued working, but with increasingly severe pain. On October 5, 1999, she visited her physician, Dr. Richard Jackson.
Dr. Jackson noted that Tefft was tender in the lumbar region of her back, had decreased range of motion and had inflamation in her back. He ordered a CT scan, which revealed a bulging disc at L5-S1 and a central herniation at L4-L5. Tefft received the results of the test on October 6, 1999. She immediately called, verbally notifying the employer and relating her belief that the injury had occurred at the Lamb home on the claimed date and insisting her claim should be covered by workers' compensation . Her claim was eventually denied.
The employer contends the accident did not happen, relying on testimony by Laws and ano
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.
|
|
By using the system, you agree to TERMS OF SERVICE
|