 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Blevins v. Camel Manufacturing Co.9/27/2000
Mailed August 22, 2000
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel 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 petitioner challenges the trial court's denial of the petitioner's motion to re- open or set aside the trial court's previous judgment, where the petitioner suffered additional injuries as a result of her workers' compensation accident. Also, the petitioner asserts that the trial court erred in ruling that the petitioner was not entitled to reimbursement for her medical expenses for treatment of additional injuries under the future medical expenses provision of said judgment. After a complete review of the entire record, briefs of the parties and applicable law, we affirm the trial court's judgment.
Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court is Affirmed.
L. Terry Lafferty, Sr. J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which William M. Barker, J., and Howell N. Peoples, Sp. J., joined.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
On August 1, 1994, the Chancery Court for Campbell County entered an order finding that the petitioner had suffered an on-the-job injury on or about May 4, 1990, while employed by the defendant. The trial court found that the petitioner sustained a permanent impairment in the amount of 25 percent to scheduled members, that is, to her loss of hearing, which equates to 150 weeks as a scheduled member, and awarded the petitioner 25 percent permanent partial disability, in addition to one week's temporary total disability, and payment of all past, present, and future medical expenses casually related to the on-the-job injury.
On June 1, 1995, the petitioner filed a petition to re-open her workers' compensation claim of April 1991. The petitioner alleges that she was advised by Dr. Donald E. Chase, D.D.S., that she had suffered unknown injuries at the time of the filing of the original complaint and that these injuries were proximately caused by the on-the-job accident of May 4, 1990. More specifically, the petitioner learned, subsequent to the judgment, that she suffered from temporal mandibular joint syndrome, commonly known as TMJ. In the alternative, the petitioner complains that her condition has worsened since the time of the judgment and that her conditions were unknown at the time of the filing of the complaint, and therefore, she seeks additional benefits.
Pursuant to Tenn. R. Civ. P. 56, the defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on the grounds that the petitioner's petition to re- open is barred by the provisions of Tennessee Code Annotated § 50-6-231. In its memorandum of law, the defendants contend that at the time of the entry of judgment, the petitioner's benefits had accrued and said benefits were paid in a lump sum. In response to the motion for summary judgment, the petitioner contends that the question of a lump sum payment is not properly in evidence before the trial court. The petitioner submits that no order had been entered by the trial court approving a lump sum payment or setting forth the defendants' satisfaction of the award making a lump sum payment. Likewise, the petitioner asserts that the petition to re-open sufficiently alleges a mistake representing the extent of the petitioner's injury existing at the time of her hearing and award, so as to bring her petition within the provisions of Tenn. R. Civ. P. 60.02.
In the defendant's reply to the petitioner's response to the motion for summary judgment, the defendants submitted an affidavit of Elda Wilkes, cla
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Tennessee Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|