 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Yarbrough v. ACH Foods3/31/2005
The employee or claimant, Ms. Yarbrough, initiated this civil action to recover workers' compensation benefits for an alleged accidental work related injury to her back. The employer, ACH Foods, specifically denied that the claimant suffered an injury by accident and asserted the claimant merely had an episode of pain from her pre-existing arthritic condition. After a trial on the merits, the trial court awarded future medical benefits, temporary total disability benefits for the period of September 17, 2002 through November 26, 2002, and permanent partial disability benefits based on 25 percent to the body as a whole. The employer has appealed.
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. ยง 50-6-225(e)(2). 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). Conclusions of law are subject to de novo review on appeal without any presumption of correctness. Hill v. Wilson Sporting Goods Co., 104 S.W.3d 844 (Tenn. Workers' Comp Panel 2002). Issues of statutory construction are solely questions of law. Id. 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, McCaleb v. Saturn Corp., 910 S.W.2d 412, 414 (Tenn. 1995), 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). Extent of vocational disability is a question of fact. Story v. Legion Ins. Co., 3 S.W.3d 450, 456 (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. Bridges v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. of Hartford, 101 S.W.3d 67 (Tenn. Workers Comp Panel 2000).
The employer manufactures cheese products. The claimant works as a lab attendant in the employer's manufacturing facility in Humboldt. One of her duties is to evaluate blocks of cheese weighing from five to forty-seven pounds. In order to perform her job, she pulls the blocks from a refrigerator onto a cart, rolls them into a lab, evaluates them and either returns the cheese blocks to the refrigerator or dumps them into fish bait barrels. On or about Saturday, October 13, 2001, the plastic liner covering one of the larger blocks of cheese hung in the barrel. While lifting the cheese and pulling the liner, the claimant felt pain in her back and down her leg. Although she had suffered dull back pain in the past, the pain she suffered on this occasion was different in that it included a burning sensation, pain in her buttocks and excruciating pain down her leg to her foot.
The claimant immediately reported the injury to the employer and finished her day's work. When the pain persisted over the weekend, she reported it again on
Page 1 2 3 Tennessee Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|