Seay v. Town of Greeneville

• Decision Date: 01 October 1979
• Citation: 587 S.W.2d 381
• Parties: Gordon M. SEAY, Appellee, v. TOWN OF GREENEVILLE, Appellant.
• Court: Tennessee Supreme Court

Page 381

587 S.W.2d 381

Gordon M. SEAY, Appellee, v. TOWN OF GREENEVILLE, Appellant.

Supreme Court of Tennessee.

Oct. 1, 1979.

Thomas L. Kilday, Milligan, Coleman, Fletcher, Gaby & Kilday, Greeneville, for appellant.

William Clyde Russell, Greeneville, for appellee.

OPINION

COOPER, Justice.

In this workmen's compensation case the employer appeals from the chancellor's award of benefits to the employee. Appellant insists the chancellor erred in finding that the appellee suffered a 50% Permanent partial disability to the body as a whole which was causally related to his employment injury. After reviewing the record, we are of the opinion that there is material medical evidence to support the chancellor's finding of causal relationship between appellee's last on-the-job injury and his disability, and the chancellor's decree is affirmed.

The employee, Gordon Seay, only has a fourth grade education and cannot read or write; consequently, he has always earned his living by doing heavy manual labor. He is accident-prone, both on and off the job, and has been injured on several occasions. Despite these injuries, he was able to work with reasonable regularity throughout the years of his employment by the maintenance department of the Town of Greeneville, doing whatever task was assigned to him.

On Saturday, March 25, 1977, appellee was assigned the task of "rolling" a ball field. In moving the 2,000 pound roller, appellee ran it onto a curbing, causing the roller to overturn. The roller did not fall on appellee but struck his back, hip, and left leg and "like to have jerked (his left shoulder) off" as he jumped from the roller. Appellee had severely injured his left shoulder in 1974 when the same roller had overturned.

Appellee and a fellow worker, who witnessed the accident, righted the roller. Appellee then went home for lunch. When the pain from his injuries did not subside but rather increased, appellee went to the office of Dr. Wayne M. Ottinger, a chiropractor, for treatment. Appellee gave notice of injury to his employer on the Monday following the accident. The employer's first report of injury was filed with the State of Tennessee on March 28, 1977.

Appellee testified that prior to his injury on March 25, 1977, he was able to do heavy manual labor. He laid blocks, set concrete tables that weighed about 400 pounds, and did other work of a similar nature that required him to be "in pretty good shape to lift and do the kind of work we did." He further testified that after his injury, he continued to work in an effort to keep his job. On a number of days when he would go home of an evening, he "would get down and couldn't get up. On a lot of mornings (he) would go in to work, and couldn't make it, and (he) would have to go home." During this time, appellee was treated by Dr. Ottinger, Dr. Sam Huddleston, and Dr. Harold Roberts. The latter two doctors advised appellee to do light work only. When it was not forthcoming, appellee left the employ of the Town of Greeneville, in October, 1977.

Dr. Ottinger testified that on appellee's first visit to him, which was approximately two hours after the accident with the roller, appellee was complaining of pain in the left shoulder, neck, low back, and the muscles of the right leg and that his complaints were consistent with objective findings. Dr. Ottinger "adjusted the subluxated vertebrae, the tight muscles in the involved area" on twelve occasions during a four week period, and was of the opinion that plaintiff had recovered from his injury.

Dr. Sam Huddleston, the orthopedic surgeon who operated on the shoulder injured by appellee in the 1974 "roller" accident and who permitted appellee to return to heavy labor, examined appellee on three occasions after his injury in 1977 April, 1977, September, 1977, and March, 1978. The latter two visits were for the purpose of evaluating appellee's complaints. On the initial visit which was for treatment, Dr. Huddleston did not take a medical history from appellee in the conventional form and, consequently, was not told of the accident of March 25, 1977. He was told that appellee was suffering "from pain in the low back, right sciatic and right ankle pain, and weakness of grip and other widespread symptoms."

Dr. Huddleston testified that "he didn't see any change basically in appellee's state in the last three or four years," and that he did not believe "it will change other than in the normal process of aging (and that) he will get worse as he gets older." Despite finding no change in appellee's basic physical condition, Dr. Huddleston testified that appellee was totally disabled from doing heavy manual labor, which was a different evaluation than he placed on appellee when he operated on his shoulder after the 1974 accident. Dr. Huddleston further...