CompFox AI Summary
In this workers’ compensation case, the employee, William H. Saylor, sought benefits for mental injuries allegedly arising from contact with hazardous material during his employment as a truck driver for Lakeway Trucking, Inc. On June 15, 1999, Saylor was splashed with hazardous liquid while investigating a leak, subsequently being diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and chronic depression. The trial court found his mental injuries compensable, concluding they arose out of and in the course of his employment, and determined he was 100% permanently disabled regarding his mental faculties. This court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding the mental injury rationally connected to the hazardous material exposure and supported by sufficient medical and lay testimony, and that the 100% permanent disability finding was not against the preponderance of the evidence.
Saylor v. Lakeway Trucking, Inc. is a workers' compensation case decided in Tennessee Supreme Court. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.
It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Tennessee Supreme Court.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
In this workers’ compensation case, the employee, William H. Saylor, sought benefits for mental injuries allegedly arising from contact with hazardous material during his employment as a truck driver for Lakeway Trucking, Inc. On June 15, 1999, Saylor was splashed with hazardous liquid while investigating a leak, subsequently being diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and chronic depression. The trial court found his mental injuries compensable, concluding they arose out of and in the course of his employment, and determined he was 100% permanently disabled regarding his mental faculties. This court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding the mental injury rationally connected to the hazardous material exposure and supported by sufficient medical and lay testimony, and that the 100% permanent disability finding was not against the preponderance of the evidence.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.