Legal Opinion

Dorris v. INA Insurance Co.

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided January 23, 1989PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FONES, Justice.

This workers’ compensation appeal presents three issues for review: (1) whether plaintiff’s claim is barred by the defense of misrepresentation of physical condition in his application for employment; (2) whether the compensation insurer (INA) is liable for medical expenses incurred for care provided by a non-designated physician; and (3) whether plaintiff met his burden of proof in establishing the permanency of his injury by medical testimony?

The trial court determined that plaintiff, Billy Joe Dorris, had suffered permanent partial disability of 55% to the body as a…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Combustion Engineering, Inc. v. KennedyTennessee Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Corcoran v. Foster Auto GMC, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Federal Copper & Aluminum Company v. DickeyTennessee Supreme Court · 1973
  4. Buchanan v. Mission Insurance Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1986
  5. PROCTER & GAMBLE DEFENSE CORPORATION v. WestTennessee Supreme Court · 1958

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Johnson v. Midwesco, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1990
  2. Bazner v. American States Insurance Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1991
  3. Ameri, Rachel v. Denso Automotive Ohio, Inc.Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims · 2020
  4. Bazner v. American States Insurance Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Bethune, Brandon v. United Parcel Service, Inc.Tennessee Court of Workers' Compensation Claims · 2016

12 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