 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
McPeak v. Specialty Surgical Instrumentation7/29/2005
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
It is indeed a great understatement that this is a most unusual case. Despite grave differences between the parties as to the legal significance of the facts, the occurrence of the factual issues themselves are virtually undisputed. Only the most abbreviated of hearings took place in this case, during which the trial court heard statements of counsel and then the very brief testimony of the Deputy Clerk for the Criminal Court. The other evidence is presented by the Appellant in the form of four affidavits filed by: 1) counsel for the Appellant, 2) the "secretary/legal assistant" for the Appellant's counsel, 3) the Clerk of the Circuit Court, and 4) the Commissioner of Commerce and Insurance.
The Appellant, a resident of Wilson County, originally was a Plaintiff in a Workers' Compensation action in the Criminal Court for Wilson County. An award of permanent partial disability apportioned to the body as a whole was made in favor of the Appellant. The Appellant returned to work for his pre-injury employer, but, less than 400 weeks later, he became unemployed under circumstances which he asserts entitle him to file a new cause of action for reconsideration of his initial disability award. Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-241 allows such a filing of a "new cause of action" when, within 400 weeks of the worker's return to work, he loses his job, provided he files his petition for reconsideration within one year of the date he lost his job.
It is undisputed that the Appellant lost his job on November 12, 2002. Thus, under the provisions of Tennessee Code Annotated section 50-6-241, the Appellant was allowed one year after that date to file his complaint, or through the close of business on November 12, 2003. The uncontroverted evidence showed that counsel for the Appellant sent by regular mail a "Complaint for Reconsideration of Workers' Compensation Award" to the office of the Clerk of the Criminal Court for Wilson County on November 7, 2003, five days prior to the expiration of the statute of limitations. Although it is also undisputed that the complaint arrived in the office of the clerk, there is no evidence as to when it was received or by whom.
The first evidence in this record of the receipt of the complaint in the office of the clerk is the testimony of Ann Boyd, a deputy clerk. Ms. Boyd testified briefly before the trial court. She explained that on Friday, November 14, 2003, she had been working outside the office, and, when she returned, the complaint was on her desk. It is undisputed that prior to any action by Ms. Boyd in processing the complaint, another unidentified deputy clerk, had stamped the complaint with a mechanical stamp, the stamp showing a "filed" date of November 14, 2003.
In addition, it is undisputed that either the same or a different deputy clerk had used a white substance, perhaps a product known as "White Out," or some similar product designed to cover errors on paper, and had covered the mechanically-stamped date such that the date of November 14, 2003 was not visible, and had written in pen a date of November 8, 2003. Ms. Boyd testified that the first time she saw the complaint, it had already been stamped with the mechanical stamp, and the date had been covered with the white substance. Ms. Boyd then testified that she proceeded to process the complaint by logging it into the computer on that Friday, November 14, 2003, she entered the filing date as November 8, 2003. The hearing in which Ms. Boyd testified appears to have been rather informal, though conducted in the courtroom, inasmuch as the record reflects what might be termed a "round-robin" discussion between the court, both attorneys, and
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Tennessee Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|