Patricia Dunn v. H.D. Lee Co.
Annotate this CaseCourt Description:
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam
Trial Court Judge: PER CURIAM
This case is before the Court upon motion for review pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. _ 50-6-225(e)(5)(B), the entire record, including the order of referral to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel, and the Panel's Memorandum Opinion setting forth its findings of fact and conclusions of law in dismissing as untimely plaintiff's claim for workers' compensation benefits.
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE PATRICIA LEE DUNN, Plaintiff/Appellee, V. H. D. LEE COMPANY, Defendant/Appellant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Lincoln Chancery No. 01-S-01-9604-CH-00061 JUDGEMENT ORDER This case is before the Court upon motion for review pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-6-225(e)(5)(B), the entire record, including the order of referral to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel, and the Panel's Memorandum Opinion setting forth its findings of fact and conclusions of law in dismissing as untimely plaintiff’s claim for workers’ compensation benefits. Whereupon, it appears to the Court that the motion for review filed by plaintiff is well taken and should be granted in light of our recent decision in Lawson v. Lear Seating Corp., ___ S.W.2d ___ (Tenn. 1997). In accordance with the principles announced in Lawson, we conclude that plaintiff’s claim for benefits was timely filed. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court finding that plaintiff’s claim was timely is affirmed. Costs will be paid by defendant-appellant. It is so ordered this 13 day of May, 1997. PER CURIAM Birch, C.J., not participating
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
