Ana R. PADILLA v. TWIN CITY FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

I respectfully dissent. A basic principle of the Workers’ Compensation Act (“the Act”) is its remedial purpose. Tenn.Code Ann. § 50-6-116 (2008);1 Trosper v. Armstrong Wood Prods., Inc., 273 S.W.3d 598, 609 n. 5 (Tenn.2008). For years, this *516Court has interpreted this statutory mandate to favor the employee under circumstances where there is “reasonable doubt” surrounding the compensability of a work-related claim. In my view, the claimant, in this instance, is entitled to the benefit of the doubt. Moreover, the “street risk doctrine,” inaptly named, should serve as an alternative basis for…