Alvarado v. Tyson Foods

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedSeptember 6, 2005
DocketI.C. NO. 371596.
StatusPublished

This text of Alvarado v. Tyson Foods (Alvarado v. Tyson Foods) 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
Alvarado v. Tyson Foods, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2005).

Opinion

***********
The Full Commission has reviewed the Deputy Commissioner's Opinion and Award based on the record of the proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner and the briefs and oral arguments before the Full Commission. The appealing party has shown good grounds to reconsider the evidence, and having reviewed the competent evidence of record, the Full Commission hereby REVERSES the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner.

***********
EVIDENTIARY MATTERS
At the hearing before the Full Commission, the plaintiff submitted a Motion to Amend Records and Compel Defendant to Produce its 2003 Federal Form 1099 reflecting defendant's total payments to Dr. Boyd. The Full Commission hereby DENIES plaintiff's Motion to Amend the Records and Compel Defendant to Produce the 2003 Federal Form 1099 to Dr. Boyd.

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

STIPULATIONS
1. The Industrial Commission has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this case, the parties are properly before the Commission, and the parties were subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act at all relevant times.

2. Defendant was a duly qualified self-insured.

3. The employee-employer relationship existed between the parties at all relevant times.

4. On September 24, 2003, plaintiff sustained a low back injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment with defendant when, as he was carrying a box filled with solid CO2, he slipped on ice on the floor, twisted his low back, and fell. Defendant admits this accident caused plaintiff to suffer a lumbar strain, but that plaintiff's disability from this accident, if any, ended on or before October 20, 2003. Defendant's position is that plaintiff's entitlement to any disability or medical compensation benefits related to his accident ended on or before October 20, 2003.

5. Plaintiff's average weekly wage was $470.96, which yields a weekly compensation rate of $313.99.

6. Defendant paid plaintiff $658.48 in temporary partial disability benefits during the period September 25, 2003, through October 19, 2003, related to this injury by accident.

7. Plaintiff last worked at defendant-employer on February 28, 2004. Plaintiff seeks to be awarded total disability benefits, beginning March 1, 2004, as well as medical compensation for his injury, including possible low back surgery.

8. The issues for determination are:

a. Was plaintiff's return to work effort, beginning on or about October 20, 2003, a trial return to work effort under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-32.1?

b. Is plaintiff entitled to additional temporary partial disability benefits for the period from September 24, 2003, through October 20, 2003?

c. Was plaintiff's trial return to work effort unsuccessful by March 1, 2004?

d. Is plaintiff entitled to a ten percent penalty for the period beginning March 1, 2004?

e. Is plaintiff entitled to additional medical compensation for treatment of his low back pain?

f. Will the Commission approve Dr. Kelly and/or Dr. Alexander at Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center to assume plaintiff's care for his back injury?

g. Are plaintiff's current back symptoms a result of his work-related injury?

h. Is defendant entitled to a credit for any short-term disability benefits paid to plaintiff?

The parties stipulated the following documentary evidence:

a. Exhibit 1 — Medical Records, 25 pages,

b. Exhibit 2 — Defendant's Employee Health Records, four pages,

c. Exhibit 3 — Records of Holloway Chiropractic, thirteen pages, and

d. Exhibit 4 — I.C. Filings, fifteen pages.

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

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. At the time of the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner, the plaintiff was a 34-year-old native of Mexico who completed the 6th grade in Mexico. The plaintiff speaks very little English and cannot read English.

2. The plaintiff came to the United States at age 16 in 1987. He worked in manual labor on a farm in California until 1990 and then moved to Florida where he worked as a farm laborer until 2001.

3. The plaintiff began working for the defendant on June 18, 2001, after being medically cleared to work as a heavy laborer.

4. Plaintiff testified at the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner that his job duties consisted of pushing a cart loaded with chicken waste approximately 200 feet through the plant to a waste location, and then dumping the waste into a receptacle. Plaintiff also lifted boxes of chicken weighing 60 — 70 pounds and pushed them across the floor, lifted 40 — 50 pounds of dry ice and dumped them into a receptacle and cleaned and washed down the floor. The plaintiff further testified that prior to September 23, 2003, he had no problems performing this job, had never had any back problems and had never hurt his back.

5. On September 24, 2003, the plaintiff was at work carrying a box of solid carbon dioxide when his foot slipped on ice on the floor, causing him to slide on the floor, lose his balance, twist and jerk his low back and fall backwards. The plaintiff felt immediate severe low back pain radiating into both legs and his legs got weak.

6. The plaintiff reported this incident to his supervisor, Toby Ham, as best he could because Mr. Ham speaks little Spanish. The plaintiff did, however, complete a Spanish-written accident report.

7. Plaintiff reported to the defendant's medical department and to the plant physician's office where he saw Mr. Gary G. Nichols, a physician's assistant. Mr. Nichols noted that the plaintiff could hardly walk and had extreme muscle spasm of the lumbar spine. Mr. Nichols determined the plaintiff suffered from "congenital spondylolistheses" and "acute lumbar sacral strain syndrome." Mr. Nichols also determined that the plaintiff could endure "no prolonged standing, pushing, pulling, lifting, bending, squatting or climbing."

8. The plaintiff attempted to return to his shift after presenting to Mr. Nichols but was experiencing too much pain in his back and in his legs. The plaintiff reported this pain to a Spanish-speaking supervisor who sent the plaintiff to Nurse Patricia Eloines. Nurse Eloines sent the plaintiff home to return the next day to report to Dr. John Bond.

9. On September 25, 2003, the plaintiff presented to Dr. Bond, general surgeon and plant physician. Dr. Bond limited the plaintiff to working only 2 hours per day with no lifting, repetitive bending, climbing, pulling or tugging. On October 8, 2003, and until October 14, 2003, Dr. Bond permitted the plaintiff to work for 4 hours per day trimming chickens, alternating sitting and standing with a stool to sit on at times.

10. On October 14, 2003, Dr. Bond injected plaintiff with Cortisone and Xylocaine and increased his working hours to 6 hours per day. The plaintiff was assigned to the "parts washer" job where he was required to pick up dropped chicken parts off of the floor. The defendant provided the plaintiff with a 3-foot metal rod with a hook on the end with which to pick up the parts without bending.

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

Related

§ 97-2
North Carolina § 97-2(6)
§ 97-25
North Carolina § 97-25
§ 97-25.1
North Carolina § 97-25.1
§ 97-29
North Carolina § 97-29
§ 97-30
North Carolina § 97-30
§ 97-32.1
North Carolina § 97-32.1
§ 97-42.1
North Carolina § 97-42.1

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Alvarado v. Tyson Foods, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alvarado-v-tyson-foods-ncworkcompcom-2005.