Legal Opinion

Continental Insurance Companies v. Pruitt

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided October 4, 1976PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HENRY, Justice.

This is a workmen’s compensation action wherein the ultimate question is the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the action of the Chancellor in awarding sixty-five (65%) percent permanent partial disability to the body as a whole in a case wherein the injury was to the upper left extremity.

The insurance carrier insists that the injury was to a scheduled member, i. e., the arm, and, therefore, an award based upon disability to the body as a whole is not authorized by § 50-1007(c) T.C.A. Relying upon Chapman v. Clement Bros., Inc., 222 Tenn. 223, 435 S.W.2d 117 (1968),…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Chapman v. Clement Brothers, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Western Pipe Line Constructors, Inc. v. DickinsonTennessee Supreme Court · 1958

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. McCaleb v. Saturn Corp.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1995
  2. Kellerman v. Food Lion, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1996
  3. Wells v. Sentry Insurance Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1992
  4. Getson v. WM BANCORPCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1997
  5. Smith v. Empire Pencil Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1989

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API