TAM-BYTES

October 5, 2015
Vol. 18, No. 40
TAM Webinars
10 Rules to Use in Tennessee Civil Lawsuits, 60-minute webinar
presented by Brandon Bass, with The Law Offices of John Day in
Brentwood, on Wednesday, October 28, at 2 p.m. (Central), 3 p.m. (Eastern).
*Earn 1 hour of GENERAL credit
Estate Administration in Tennessee: Identifying Assets and Satisfying
Creditor Claims, 60-minute webinar presented by Grayson Smith
Cannon, with Phillips & Ingrum in Gallatin, on Wednesday, November 18,
at 2 p.m. (Central), 3 p.m. (Eastern).
*Earn 1 hour of GENERAL credit
Amendments to Federal E-Discovery Rules Take Effect December 1:
Are You Ready?, 60-minute webinar presented by Tom Shaw, Assistant
General Counsel with CCA Legal Department in Nashville and Russell
Taber, with Riley Warnock & Jacobson in Nashville, on Tuesday,
December 1, at 2 p.m. (Central), 3 p.m. (Eastern).
*Earn 1 hour of GENERAL credit
Engaging Clients Online: Attorney Guidelines for Websites, Blogging,
and Social Media, 60-minute webinar presented by Vincent J. V.J.
Graffeo, Birmingham attorneys, on Thursday, December 3, at 2 p.m.
(Central), 3 p.m. (Eastern).
*Earn 1 hour of GENERAL credit
Procedural Rules in Tennessee Using Motions to Enhance Your
Practice, 60-minute webinar presented by John Elder, with Paine
Bickers in Knoxville, on Tuesday, December 8, at 10 a.m. (Central), 11
a.m. (Eastern).
*Earn 1 hour of GENERAL credit

Judgment Collection in Tennessee: Steps to Take When the Judgment

Debtor Files Bankruptcy, 60-minute webinar presented by Griffin
Dunham, with Emerge Law in Nashville, on Wednesday, December 9, at 2
p.m. (Central), 3 p.m. (Eastern).
*Earn 1 hour of GENERAL credit
For more information or to register, call (800) 727-5257 or visit www.mleesmith.com

TAM On-Site Events

Tennessee Real Estate Law Conference

WHEN: Friday, October 30
WHERE: Nashville Nashville School of Law
CLE: Earn up to 7.5 hours of CLE, including 6.5 hours of GENERAL and 1
hour of DUAL credit
FACULTY: Kim Brown, Sherrard & Roe; Christopher S. Dunn, Waller,
Lansden, Dortch & Davis; Robert C. Goodrich Jr., Burr & Forman; Lisa
Helton, Sherrard & Roe; Zachary Miller, Burr & Forman; C. Palmer
Pillans, Butler Snow; Marcy Shelton, Gullett Sanford Robinson & Martin;
Wes Turner, Gullett Sanford Robinson & Martin; and Dudley M. West,
White & Reasor, PLC.
HIGHLIGHTS: Drafting commercial leases; commercial development and
financing; mechanics and materialmens liens; commercial foreclosure
issues; hot topics in title insurance; consumer mortgages and the impact of
the new CFPB rules; ethical considerations in real estate law; and real estate
case law/legislative update
To learn more or to register, visit: www.mleesmith.com/tn-real-estate-2015

Law Conference for Tennessee Practitioners

WHEN: Thursday & Friday, November 12 & 13
WHERE: Nashville -- Marriott Franklin/Cool Springs
CLE: Earn all your CLE for 2015 up to 15 hours of GENERAL credit and
3 hours of DUAL credit!!

FACULTY: Judge Frank Clement, Court of Appeals, Middle Section;

Judge Joseph P. Binkley, Circuit Court, Davidson County; Chancellor
Ellen Hobbs Lyle, Chancery Court, Davidson County; Chancellor Russell
T. Perkins, Chancery Court, Davidson County; David Anthony, Bone
McAllester & Norton PLLC; Laura Baker, Law Offices of John Day P.C.;
Dale Conder, Rainey Kizer Reviere & Bell PLC; Dan Coughlin,
Massengill, Caldwell & Coughlin PC; Griffin Dunham, Emerge Law PLC;
Sandy Garrett, Chief Disciplinary Counsel, Board of Professional
Responsibility; Candi Henry, Dodson Parker Behm & Capparella PC;
Randy L. Kinnard, Kinnard, Clayton & Beveridge; Brenton H. Lankford,
Stites & Harbison PLLC; Matt Potempa, Martin Heller Potempa &
Sheppard; and Richard Spore, Bass, Berry & Sims PLC
HIGHLIGHTS: Overview of Tennessees new business court; recent
developments in healthcare liability; use of judgment liens on real and personal
property; family law highlights; tips on handling uninsured/underinsured
motorist claims; sophisticated deposition strategies; rules that practitioners
seldom encounter; representing a client in a business divorce; using websites
and social media to promote your law practice; probating wills and
administering estates; pretrial motion practice; the deferential abuse of
discretion standard of review; update from the Board of Professional
Responsibility; ethics and evidence; and professionalism in the practice of law.
To learn more or to register, visit: http://www.mleesmith.com/law-conference-2015

Tennessee Workers Comp Conference

WHEN: Thursday & Friday, November 19 & 20
WHERE: Nashville Embassy Suites Franklin/Cool Springs
CLE: Earn up to 14 hours of GENERAL credit and 1 hour of DUAL credit!!
FACULTY: WORKERS COMP JUDGES: Judge Tim Conner; Judge
Marshall Davidson; Judge Pam Johnson; and Chief Judge Ken Switzer.
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT: Troy
Haley; Dr. Robert B. Snyder; April Verdoni; and Lance Wheaton.
WORKERS COMP ATTORNEYS: Mary Dee Allen; Fred Baker; Leslie
Bishop; Kitty Boyte; Greg Grisham; Sean Antone Hunt; Steve Libby;
Mary Beth Maddox; Marshall McClarnon; Kenneth D. Veit; and Elaine
M. Youngblood. OTHERS: Wendy Fisher; Dr. Jeffrey Hazlewood; and
Christine Chris McEvoy.

HIGHLIGHTS: Insight from judges on the Court of Workers

Compensation Claims and the Workers Compensation Appeals Board;
comparison of cases and factual scenarios under the old and new law; review
of medical panels under the new law, hot topics in workers comp today, and
the interplay between workers comp, the ADA, and the FMLA; insight from
Department of Labor and Workforce Development representatives on the
drug-free workplace program, the new pain management rules, penaltyworthy offenses, and the ombudsman program; and a doctors perspective on
deterring abuse of pain medication in workers comp claims. Attorney track
also features a session on dos and donts when trying a case in the Court of
Workers Compensation Claims, how the new rules really work in practice,
settlement options including MSAs, hot topics in workers comp from both
the plaintiffs and defense perspectives, ethical issues arising under the new
law, and a panel discussion each day featuring defense and plaintiffs
attorneys, as well as a review of the latest cases from the Tennessee Supreme
Court, Workers Compensation Appeals Panels, Workers Compensation
Appeals Board, and Court of Workers Compensation Claims.
To learn more or to register, visit: http://www.mleesmith.com/workers-comp-2015

Family Law Conference for Tennessee Practitioners

WHEN: Thursday & Friday, December 3 & 4
WHERE: Nashville Nashville School of Law
CLE: Earn all your CLE for 2015 up to 15 hours of GENERAL credit and
3 hours of DUAL credit!!
FACULTY: Judge Robert L. Childers, circuit court, Shelby County;
Judge Phillip Robinson, circuit court, Davidson County; Judge Joseph
Woodruff, circuit court, 21st Judicial District (Hickman, Lewis, Perry, and
Williamson counties); and Judge Thomas Wright, circuit court, 3rd Judicial
Circuit (Greene, Hamblen, Hancock, and Hawkins counties); along with
attorneys Amy J. Amundsen, Rice, Amundsen & Caperton PLLC,
Memphis; John J. Hollins, Jr., Hollins, Raybin & Weissman PC, Nashville;
Cathy Speers Johnson, Thompson Burton PLLC, Nashville; Stanley A.
Kweller, Jackson, Kweller, McKinney, Hayes, Lewis & Garrett, Nashville;
Marlene Moses, MTR Family Law, PLLC, Nashville; Linley Richter, Jr.,
Richter & Rasberry, P.C., Memphis; Kevin Shepherd, Maryville attorney;
Greg Smith, Stites & Harbison PLLC, Nashville; Jason Talley, Cheatham,
Palermo & Garrett Law; and Jacob Thorington, Cheatham, Palermo &
Garrett Law, Nashville

HIGHLIGHTS: Protecting a clients separate assets; valuing and dividing

marital property; access to mental health records in a custody case; special
issues in military divorce; practical tips from judges on issues such as
attorney fees, contempt, and child custody modification; marketing yourself
and your law firm; social media tips and tricks; domestic violence cases and
mediation; cohabiting couples and same-sex marriages; attorney fees in
family matters and contempt; case law/legislative update; and ethical
considerations in family law.
To learn more or to register, visit: http://www.mleesmith.com/family-law-15

Attorney Technology Conference

WHEN: Friday, December 11
WHERE: Nashville Nashville School of Law
CLE: Earn up to 7.5 hours of CLE, including 6.5 hours of GENERAL and 1
hour of DUAL credit
FACULTY: Judge Thomas Brothers, Davidson County Circuit Court;
David Anthony, Bone McAllester Norton PLLC, Nashville; Andr J.
Bahou, Bahou Law PLC, Brentwood; Ian Bourgoine, Belmont University
College of Law, Nashville; Nancy Eady, Morris, Haynes, Wheeles,
Knowles, & Nelson, Alexander City, AL; William M. Jeter, Heaton and
Moore PC, Memphis; Tom Shaw, Assistant General Counsel, CCA Legal
Department; and Russell Taber, Riley Warnock & Jacobson PLC, Nashville
HIGHLIGHTS: Practical tech tips: Recovering data, archiving and
preserving data, and sharing and retrieving data; time-saving tools that every
attorney should have in his or her technology toolkit; how to make your
social media evidence usable at trial; a judges perspective on technology in
the courtroom and e-discovery; how to find free legal research sites and free
case law; tips and strategies for collecting social media evidence to use at
trial; how to find practice tools, such as sample forms, contracts, briefs, and
settlements; update on new federal e-discovery rules; how to use blogs and
social media to grow your practice; and ethical issues inherent in cloud
computing
To learn more or to register, visit: www.mleesmith.com/tech-2015

IN THIS WEEKS TAM-Bytes

Supreme Court rules that state must refund over $16 million in taxes
paid by claimants, five groups of Pennsylvania-domiciled insurance
companies that filed complaints seeking refund of retaliatory taxes
paid in Tennessee, when claimants were not required to calculate
Pennsylvania workers comp assessments as part of their retaliatory
tax in Tennessee because assessments were paid by policyholders,
not insurance companies;
Court of Appeals rules that when plaintiffs substantially complied
with TCA 29-26-121 and plaintiffs errors in failing to strictly
comply did not result in prejudice to defendants, their healthcare
liability action should not be dismissed due to plaintiffs failure to
attach medical authorization and pre-suit notice letters with their
complaint;
Court of Appeals says because terminated police officer had previously
obtained judgment for front pay upon his election of such remedy in
federal case arising from same circumstances, officer is precluded from
seeking remedy of reinstatement;
Court of Appeals finds exception to claim of adverse possession
enunciated in Cumulus Broadcasting Inc. v. Shim was applicable when
disputed property was contiguous to plaintiffs and defendants land,
relatively small area of land was at issue, and adjacent property owners
making claims of ownership had paid their respective real estate taxes;
Court of Appeals says that when amended complaint supersedes and
destroys original complaint, trial court is required to revisit question
of venue in light of parties and causes of action included in amended
complaint;
Court of Criminal Appeals says trial courts, particularly those
conducting trials involving sequestered juries, should consider limiting
jurors access to personal electronic devices and utilizing pattern jury
instruction regarding electronic communication; and
Court of Criminal Appeals, in reversing defendants vehicular
homicide conviction, rules trial court erred in denying defendants
motion to suppress evidence obtained from warrantless blood draw
when no exigent circumstances justified warrantless search.
SUPREME COURT
INSURANCE: In case in which five groups of Pennsylvania-domiciled
insurance companies filed complaints in Tennessee Claims Commission

seeking refund of retaliatory taxes in Tennessee, claims commissioner had

no authority to impose retaliatory tax upon claimants when workers'
compensation assessments at issue must be paid by employer-policyholders
in conjunction with their premium payments, and hence, administrative task
of collecting and remitting those payments does not qualify as burden on
insurance companies for purposes of retaliatory tax. Chartis Casualty Co. v.
State, 10/2/15, Nashville, Wade, unanimous, 18 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/chartiscasualtyopn_1.pdf

COURT OF APPEALS
TORTS: In case alleging negligence in two surgeries in which defendants
assert plaintiffs pre-suit notice failed to comply with requirements of TCA
29-26-121, plaintiffs medical authorization substantially complied with
HIPAA; because plaintiffs substantially complied with TCA 29-26-121 and
plaintiffs errors in failing to strictly comply did not result in prejudice to
defendants, their action should not be dismissed due to plaintiffs failure to
attach medical authorization and pre-suit notice letters with their complaint.
Hunt v. Nair, 9/25/15, ES, Susano, 18 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/hunt_v._nair_m.d.pdf

TORTS: When home was completely destroyed by fire during

construction, plaintiff homeowners sued projects general contractor and
various subcontractors employed by general contractor, trial court properly
granted general contractor summary judgment regarding its own negligence
and res ipsa loquitor; contractual provision does not establish general
contractors exclusive control as element of doctrine of res ispa loquitor
when plaintiffs enjoyed unhindered access to homes interior, as did
numerous workers and subcontractors; trial court erred in granting summary
judgment in favor of flooring subcontractors on issue of negligence when
plaintiffs demonstrated that flooring subcontractors owed duty to exercise
reasonable care when working on property and that this duty had allegedly
been breached when flooring subcontractors improperly disposed of
flammable rags and cigarette butts; evidence created genuine issue of
material fact with regard to whether plaintiffs first materially breached
contract. Jenkins v. Big City Remodeling, 9/29/15, ES, Frierson, partial
dissent by Susano, 18 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/jenkins.opinion.final2_.pdf
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/jenkins_v._big_city_remodeling_susano_concurring_in_part_.pdf

EMPLOYMENT: In case in which plaintiffs (police officers) employment

was terminated on grounds of unfitness for duty due to post-traumatic stress
disorder suffered as result of officers active military service while on leave

from his employment, because plaintiff previously obtained judgment for

front pay upon his election of such remedy in federal case arising from same
circumstances, plaintiff is precluded from seeking remedy of reinstatement;
Tennessee courts have recognized that employee who is found to be
wrongfully discharged can be made whole through an award of back pay
and either reinstatement or, in certain circumstances, front pay. Hoback v.
City of Chattanooga, 9/28/15, ES, Frierson, 19 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/hoback_opinion_final.pdf

PROPERTY: In case involving dispute over narrow strip of real property

adjacent to boundary line of tracts of land owned by plaintiffs and
defendants, plaintiffs filed suit seeking ejectment and declaration that they
owned disputed property, and defendants claimed that they were entitled to
property because of their many years of adverse possession, trial judge
properly ruled that defendants established ownership by adverse possession
and that exception enunciated in Cumulus Broadcasting Inc. v. Shim, 226
SW3d 366 (Tenn. 2007), was applicable Cumulus stated that TCA 28-2110, which bars adverse possession claim when plaintiff had not paid
property taxes on disputed property for more than 20 years, does not apply
when tracts are contiguous, relatively small area is at issue, and adjacent
owners making claims of ownership have paid their respective real estate
taxes; because tracts are contiguous, relatively small area is at issue, and both
defendants and plaintiffs paid property taxes on their respective parcels (and
both thought they were paying taxes on disputed strip of property), Cumulus
exception has been established; fact that public right-of-way for roadway
exists does not render plaintiffs and defendants tracts non-contiguous.
Holtsclaw v. Johnson, 9/28/15, ES, Susano, 14 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/holtsclaw_v_johnson_2015-09-21.pdf

ESTATES & TRUSTS: When five of decedents grandchildren filed

action to contest validity of decedents will, following mediation,
grandchildren and decedents three living children entered into settlement
agreement, which trial court approved and incorporated into agreed order
distributing assets of estate, appellant, daughter of decedents deceased son,
filed action alleging that she was entitled to share of estate under terms of
agreed order, and appellant, who was not party to settlement agreement,
also alleged that her siblings perpetrated fraud by representing to court that
deceased son had only three children and heirs at law when he actually had
four, including appellant, trial court erred in granting appellees TRCP
12.02(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state claim upon which relief could
be granted; complaint stated viable claim for fraud when, construing
complaint liberally, presuming all of appellants factual allegations to be
true and giving her benefit of all reasonable inferences, her complaint

alleges, in effect, that settling heirs deliberately concealed appellants

existence and status as deceased sons heir, in order to purposely cut her out
of settlement agreement, despite being fully aware that she was sons
daughter and heir as established by prior court order. In re Estate of
McCartt, 9/25/15, ES, Susano, 14 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/in_re_estate_of_mccartt.pdf

FAMILY LAW: Trial court did not abuse discretion by designating father as
childs primary residential parent when father was more stable financially
than mother at time of trial, mother has moved at least twice since she moved
out of family house in 2011, whereas father has continued to remain in same
house, although father has suffered from fits of temper, he has participated
in anger management classes as well as parenting classes, and evidence was
introduced that child did not always get his homework done while he was
with mother and that father has had to help child catch up on his missed
homework when child has gone to his house after being with mother. Roland
v. Roland, 9/29/15, MS, Bennett, 20 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/rolandj.opn_.pdf

FAMILY LAW: Evidence did not preponderate against trial courts award to
wife of alimony in futuro of $3,500 per month until husbands child support
obligation terminated and $4,500 per month thereafter when husbands
earning capacity from his employment was significantly greater than wifes
earning capacity from her handyman business (husband was earning $12,000
per month versus $1,000 per month for wife), and even with additional
education or training, husband presented no evidence that wifes income level
could ever be comparable to his trial court found that husband would enjoy
large monthly surplus in his income and that wifes reasonable expenses
exceeded her income. Jenkins v. Jenkins, 9/25/15, ES, Frierson, 12 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/jenkins.opn_.final_.pdf

CIVIL PROCEDURE: When plaintiff filed medical malpractice action on

9/8/11 against Cookeville Regional Medical Center, governmental entity
subject to Governmental Tort Liability Act (GTLA), Medical Center filed
motion to dismiss for failure to state claim, relying on Cunningham v.
Williamson County Hospital District, 405 SW3d 41 (Tenn. 2013), to
support its assertion that plaintiffs suit was untimely filed because it was
not filed within one-year statute of limitation set forth in GTLA, and
plaintiff contended that Cunningham should be applied prospectively so as
to preserve plaintiffs claim as timely, trial court properly ruled that
Cunningham was controlling; plaintiffs cause of action accrued on 5/18/10,
after giving pre-suit notice on 5/11/11 and relying upon tolling provision in
TCA 29-26-121(c), plaintiff filed her complaint against governmental entity
on 9/8/11, which was one year and 133 days after cause of action accrued,

because cause of action accrued prior to 10/1/11, Health Care Liability Act
does not apply, and thus, statute of limitation was not extended by giving
pre-suit notice of intent to file claim. Miller ex rel. Miller v. Cookeville
Regional Medical Center, 9/29/15, MS, Clement, 7 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/millerf.opn_.pdf

CIVIL PROCEDURE: When plaintiff filed original suit in Shelby County

against appellants, pathology group located in Shelby County, appellants
raised as affirmative defense comparative negligence of appellees,
plaintiffs primary care physician and his employer, who are residents of
Sumner County, plaintiff moved under TCA 20-1-119 for leave to amend
complaint to add Sumner County residents to suit, leave was granted,
plaintiff filed amended complaint under TRCP 15.01, and appellees averred
that venue was improper in Shelby County under TCA 20-4-101(b), trial
court did not err in transferring case to Sumner County; when amended
complaint superseded and destroyed original complaint, trial court was
required to revisit question of venue in light of parties and causes of action
included in amended compliant; because cause of action arose in Sumner
County and because both plaintiff and appellees reside in Sumner County,
venue is proper in Sumner County under TCA 20-4-101(b), and hence,
Shelby County trial court did not err in transferring case to Sumner County.
Barrett v. Chesney, 9/28/15, WS, Armstrong, 14 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/barrettkathleenopn.pdf

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Trial judge, in murder trial, did not err in
allowing sequestered jurors to have their cell phones in their possession
during trial when defendant did not allege or offer any proof that they
actually used their phones to communicate with persons outside jury or to
engage in prohibited internet research about case although defendant has
shown possibility of a prohibited separation of the jury via contact with
third parties, he has not shown that actual separation occurred; neither
Tennessee Code nor Tennessee appellate courts have directly addressed what,
if any, electronic devices jury members are allowed to retain during
sequestered trials, and while TPI Crim. 1.09 admonishes jurors not to use
electronic devices or social media to communicate about the case, it stops
short of prohibiting all usage, and it is not specific to trials in which jury is
sequestered; in absence of any specific directives from Tennessee Supreme
Court, trial courts, particularly those conducting trials involving sequestered
juries, should consider limiting jurors access to personal electronic devices

and utilizing pattern jury instruction regarding electronic communication.

State v. Rayfield, 9/28/15, Nashville, Montgomery, 29 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/rayfielddennisallenopn.pdf

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: In case in which defendant was convicted of

vehicular homicide by intoxication, trial judge erred in denying defendants
motion to suppress evidence obtained from warrantless blood draw when no
exigent circumstances justified warrantless search there was no evidence in
record about length of time it actually would have taken to obtain warrant, and
there was nothing to suggest that obtaining warrant on this particular night
would have taken longer than in other cases, and while captain testified that it
was necessary for all of responding officers to remain on scene to investigate
and clear it before morning commute, at least two officers were directed to
leave scene to obtain blood samples from defendant and victim, and state
failed to explain why one of these officers could not have returned to police
department to start warrant process while defendant was being transported to
hospital; defendants conviction is vacated, and case is remanded for new
trial. State v. Cates, 9/28/15, Knoxville, McMullen, 19 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/catesmicahopn.pdf

CRIMINAL SENTENCING: In case in which defendant pled guilty to four

counts of aggravated robbery, two counts of theft by shoplifting, and one
count of attempted aggravated robbery, trial court abused discretion by
imposing partial consecutive sentencing that resulted in effective sentence of
44 years when, considering circumstances of offenses, i.e., that robberies
were committed with toy gun, no one was injured, and two of victims knew
that gun was plastic, fact that defendant was 49 years old, fact that defendant
had complete lack of previous violent offenses, and fact that defendant was
already serving 12-year sentence at time of sentencing for these convictions,
imposition of concurrent sentences that will confine defendant until age 70
will certainly protect public from defendant and serve to appropriately punish
him for his crimes. State v. Biggs, 9/30/15, Knoxville, Thomas, dissent by
Woodall, 10 pages.
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/biggsdonaldaliasopn.pdf
http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/biggsdonalddis.doc_3.pdf

COURT OF WORKERS COMP CLAIMS

WORKERS COMPENSATION: In case in which employee fell from
ladder while preparing wall to paint and principal contractor presented letter
allegedly written by employee it claims serves as liability waiver and
prevents employee from holding it liable for accident, but letter does not
mention principal contractor, is not dated, and had not been properly

authenticated; even if letter were dated and authenticated, it does not bar
employee from recovering benefits from principal contractor because TCA
50-6-114(a) expressly prohibits relieving employer from its obligation
under Workers Compensation Law through contract or agreement.
Sanabria v. Zelaya, 6/18/15, Baker, 10 pages.
http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1121&context=utk_workerscomp

WORKERS COMPENSATION: When employee reported injury to her

low back on 7/11/14, which she alleged occurred when she lifted and
stacked totes and bins at employer, employees claim requesting temporary
disability and medical benefits is denied when authorized treating physician
selected from panel of physicians indicated [t]his is not a situation where
[employee] suffered any harmful event to her body as related to work,
and employee failed to offer contrary opinion to rebut physicians opinion.
Velsor v. Amazon.com Inc., 6/16/15, Johnson, 8 pages.
http://trace.tennessee.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1111&context=utk_workerscomp

If you would like a copy of the full text of any of these opinions, simply
click on the link provided or, if no link is provided, you may respond to
this e-mail or call us at (615) 661-0248 in order to request a copy. You
may also view and download the full text of any state appellate court
decision by accessing the states web site by clicking here:
http://www.tncourts.gov