Acton v. Lowes

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedJuly 24, 2007
DocketI.C. Nos. 217415 916514.
StatusPublished

This text of Acton v. Lowes (Acton v. Lowes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Carolina Industrial Commission primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Acton v. Lowes, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2007).

Opinion

* * * * * * * * * * *
The Full Commission reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Griffin and the briefs and oral arguments before the Full Commission. The appealing party has not shown good ground to reconsider the evidence; receive further evidence; rehear the parties or their representatives; or amend the Opinion and Award, except for minor modifications. Accordingly, the Full Commission affirms the Opinion and Award of Deputy Commissioner Griffin with modifications.

* * * * * * * * * * *
The Full Commission finds as fact and concludes as matters of law the following which were entered into by the parties as:

STIPULATIONS
1. The parties are subject to the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act. *Page 2

2. The employer-employee relationship existed between the named employee and named employer on or about February 17, 2002, the date of the admitted compensable injury.

3. The carrier liable on the risk is Specialty Risk Services.

4. The parties stipulate that employee's average weekly wage as of February 17, 2002 was $430.32, which results in a compensation rate of $286.89.

5. The parties agree that the injury arose out of and within the course and scope of employee's employment and is compensable.

* * * * * * * * * * *
The following documents were submitted to the Deputy Commissioner as:

EXHIBITS
1. Stipulated Exhibit Number 1, Pre-Trial Agreement for June 28, 2005 hearing;

2. Stipulated Exhibit Number 2, Medical Records;

3. Stipulated Exhibit Number 3, Industrial Commission Forms and Filings; and

4. Stipulated Exhibit Number 4, Pre-Trial Agreement, Medical Records submitted at November 21, 2005 hearing

* * * * * * * * * * *
The following were received into evidence by the Deputy Commissioner as:

DEPOSITIONS
1. Oral deposition of Kevin Speer, M.D., taken on April 4, 2006;

2. Oral deposition of Yvonne T. Sherman, taken on April 7, 2006;

3. Oral deposition of Gary L. Smoot, M.D., taken on April 11, 2006, with Plaintiff's Exhibits numbered 1 to 7 attached to the deposition transcript; *Page 3

4. Oral deposition of Edwin Hoeper, M.D., taken on May 25, 2005 with Plaintiff's Exhibits numbered 1 to 3 attached to the deposition transcript; and,

5. Oral deposition of Richard Dobson, M.D., taken on June 2, 2006.

* * * * * * * * * * *
Based upon all of the competent evidence of record and reasonable inferences flowing therefrom, the Full Commission makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On December 18, 1998, the plaintiff was employed as a group leader for the defendant-employer. On that date, the plaintiff injured his left knee while lifting a steel beam. Defendants accepted liability for this claim, which is Industrial Commission file number 916514.

2. As a result of his compensable left knee injury, the plaintiff underwent two arthroscopic surgeries of the left knee. Pursuant to a Form 21 Agreement, the defendants paid plaintiff for a twenty percent (20%) permanent partial impairment rating to the left knee on August 20, 2001. The plaintiff was released to return to work with a 55-pound maximum lifting restriction.

3. On February 17, 2002, the plaintiff sustained a second injury while employed as a group leader for the defendant-employer. The plaintiff fell from a ladder injuring his back and neck. The defendants also accepted liability for this claim and authorized the plaintiff to seek medical treatment. This injury is the subject of Industrial Commission file number 217514.

4. Dr. Kevin Speer, an orthopaedic surgeon, diagnosed the plaintiff with a lumbar and cervical strain and contusion. Because the plaintiff's back and neck were not improving with conservative treatment, Dr. Speer referred the plaintiff to Dr. Gary L. Smoot for epidural steroid injections. *Page 4

5. Dr. Smoot recommended repeating the Steroid Dose Pak and revisiting physical therapy with a new therapist, and gave the plaintiff a prescription for pain relief. The plaintiff reported his symptoms were not improving with either the medications or physical therapy. On August 1, 2002, Dr. Smoot felt that there was no other reasonable medical intervention that he could provide to relieve the plaintiff's continued pain. As a result, Dr. Smoot released the plaintiff from his care and referred him for a functional capacity evaluation to determine his work status. Dr. Smoot assigned the plaintiff a 0% permanent partial impairment rating to the spine.

6. On August 8, 2002, the plaintiff underwent a functional capacity evaluation (FCE), which confirmed that he is capable of performing work at a medium physical demand category. Subsequently, the defendants submitted a job description for a position as a "team leader" to Dr. Smoot. Upon review, Dr. Smoot modified the provision, which would require the plaintiff to move objects up to 200 pounds, to read "50 pounds per FCE." Following the February 21, 2003 mediation, the plaintiff did not return to work in the team leader position or any other position with the defendant-employer.

7. On January 15, 2003, Dr. Richard C. Dobson evaluated the plaintiff for continued complaints of pain in the back and neck. Dr. Dobson did not have the plaintiff's medical records and relied on the medical history provided by the plaintiff during his examination. Dr. Dobson prescribed medication, ordered updated x-rays and an MRI scan and recommended the plaintiff return for further treatment.

8. After his initial visit with Dr. Dobson, the plaintiff sought treatment with several medical providers for his neck and back including his family physician, Dr. Regina Ryan, the Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Durham, and Dr. Samuel K. St. Clair, a neurologist. *Page 5

9. On September 10, 2003, the plaintiff returned to Dr. Dobson for follow-up and an electrodiagnostic study. The plaintiff still did not provide Dr. Dobson with his medical records from his prior medical treatment for his neck and back injuries. After reviewing the MRI results from a previous scan, Dr. Dobson diagnosed the plaintiff with cervical and lumbar disc injuries and determined that none of the studies indicated the need for surgical intervention. Based on his diagnosis and the plaintiff's subjective complaints of ongoing pain, Dr. Dobson testified that due to his compensable injury of February 17, 2002, the plaintiff was totally disabled from all gainful employment.

10. At the referral of Dr. Ryan, the plaintiff treated with Dr. Erhan C. Atasoy for pain management. Dr. Ryan also referred the plaintiff to Dr. Edwin W. Hoeper for psychiatric treatment. Dr. Hoeper continued to treat the plaintiff for his mental conditions through June 10, 2005.

11. The parties participated in a mediated settlement conference on February 21, 2003. The plaintiff was accompanied by his wife and represented by his prior counsel, Attorney Bob Lucas. At the mediation, the parties settled both claims for $25,000.00, and the plaintiff signed the mediated settlement agreement.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Lemly v. Colvard Oil Co.
577 S.E.2d 712 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Acton v. Lowes, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/acton-v-lowes-ncworkcompcom-2007.