Archie v. Old Salem Tavern

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedApril 1, 2004
DocketI.C. NO. 173571
StatusPublished

This text of Archie v. Old Salem Tavern (Archie v. Old Salem Tavern) 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
Archie v. Old Salem Tavern, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2004).

Opinion

***********
The undersigned have reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Stanback and the briefs and arguments of the parties. 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 with minor modifications.

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

STIPULATIONS
1. The parties are bound by and subject to the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

2. During the pertinent times in question, the employer-employee relationship existed between the defendant — employer and plaintiff-employee in North Carolina.

3. Montgomery Insurance Company is the carrier on the risk.

4. Plaintiff claims to have sustained mental, emotional and physical injuries as a result of an assault, which occurred in the course and scope of her employment on June 6, 2001, and defendants have denied this claim.

5. Plaintiff's average weekly wage may be determined by wage documentation and/or a Form 22 to be submitted at the time of the hearing before the deputy commissioner.

6. Documents stipulated into evidence include the following:

a. Stipulated Exhibit #1 — Plaintiff's Medical Records

b. Stipulated Exhibit #2 — Industrial Commission Pleadings Index

c. Stipulated Exhibit #3 — Industrial Commission Form 22

d. Stipulated Exhibit #4 — Winston-Salem Police Report

7. The following documents were received and admitted into evidence at the hearing before the deputy commissioner:

a. Pre-Trial Agreement entered into by the parties.

b. Certified copies of two Forsyth County criminal files.

8. The depositions of Tiffany Hope O'Dell, Dr. Kenneth G. Tomberlin, Dr. Nancy L. Murphy and Megan Haszard Logan, licensed clinical social worker, were received and admitted into evidence.

***********
Based upon the evidence of record the Full Commission makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Plaintiff was 67 years old at the time of the hearing before the deputy commissioner (date of birth: June 30, 1935) was born and raised in Germany and has her high school diploma. She moved to the United States in 1960, and after raising her children, she worked as a housekeeper and housekeeping supervisor for a number of years. Plaintiff has no additional job experience.

2. Plaintiff retired from housekeeping at age 62 and thereafter in the late 1990s began working two part-time jobs as a housekeeper. Plaintiff worked three hours per day, six days per week for defendant-employer cleaning its restaurant prior to business hours. She earned $8.50 per hour, and her average weekly wage was $136.92. In addition, plaintiff worked five days per week, two to four hours per day performing housecleaning duties at a hotel establishment across the street from defendant-employer earning $7.00 per hour.

3. Defendant-employer's restaurant consists of four stories, with a kitchen in the basement, a first and second story containing dining rooms and a bar, and a fourth story where supplies are kept. Plaintiff's job duties included arriving at approximately 8:00 a.m., climbing two flights of stairs to obtain cleaning supplies, and scrubbing, dusting and mopping the first and second floor dining rooms. As part of her job duties, plaintiff was responsible for making coffee for the kitchen crew, as the coffee maker was on the first level where she worked. The kitchen crew also came to the first level periodically to obtain soda from the bar area. During plaintiff's work hours there was generally no manager or supervisor on the first or second floor, and plaintiff worked alone.

4. In or about April 2001 defendant-employer hired Joseph Tyrone Tuttle to work as a line cook with job duties including preparation of food. Defendant-employer did not perform a background check of Mr. Tuttle, which would have revealed that he had a criminal record for violence against women. Mr. Tuttle and plaintiff had no personal relationship and did not come into contact with each other outside of employment. There was no evidence in the record to establish or suggest that Mr. Tuttle had any anger or hatred towards plaintiff.

5. On June 6, 2001, plaintiff reported to work shortly before 8:00 a.m. As usual, there was no manager or supervisor on the floors where plaintiff worked, however, kitchen manager Steve Novicki, baker Rosa Gonzalez and Joseph Tuttle were working in the kitchen area, which is located in the basement of the restaurant. After obtaining her cleaning supplies, plaintiff made a pot of coffee on the first floor for the kitchen crew. Making the coffee for the kitchen crew was a part of plaintiff's normal activities that she performed for the benefit of defendant-employer. Plaintiff was working unsupervised on the first floor when thereafter, Mr. Tuttle came up from the kitchen into the first floor dining room on several occasions, complaining he was feeling sick and obtaining soda from the bar. Mr. Tuttle also went upstairs to the second floor dining room, advising plaintiff that he wanted to check it out. On another occasion Mr. Tuttle entered the first floor dining room where plaintiff was working carrying a large butcher knife from the kitchen. Plaintiff advised Mr. Tuttle that he should not be walking around with a knife as he could hurt himself.

6. Later in the morning of June 6, 2001, Mr. Tuttle again came upstairs from the kitchen to the first floor where plaintiff was working alone. He was carrying a butcher knife from the kitchen of defendant-employer. Mr. Tuttle told plaintiff that she needed to make another pot of coffee for the kitchen crew, as the pot she had previously made was cold. Plaintiff began making a pot of coffee for Mr. Tuttle and the kitchen crew, and in the process, was attacked from behind by Mr. Tuttle who held the kitchen knife to her. Mr. Tuttle dragged the plaintiff to the empty second floor of the restaurant where he proceeded to rape plaintiff. During the sexual assault, plaintiff suffered cuts on her right hand in an attempt to defend herself, and she feared that she would be stabbed and killed. After the assault, Mr. Tuttle instructed plaintiff to go to the bathroom on the second floor and clean herself. Plaintiff feared that if she did so, Mr. Tuttle would follow her and kill her in the bathroom. Thus, instead of proceeding to the bathroom, plaintiff ran down the stairs. Mr. Tuttle followed her, threatened her, and threw the butcher knife at plaintiff. The knife landed on the stairs and was later found by the police. On June 6, 2001, plaintiff sustained a compensable injury by accident arising out of and in the course of her employment with the defendant-employer.

7. After escaping from Mr. Tuttle, plaintiff ran across the street to the Inn where she worked her second job. She had on no clothing from the waist down and after pounding on the door of the Inn was assisted by Todd Sanders and Bobbi Wooten who contacted the police.

8. Plaintiff provided a statement to the police and was thereafter taken to the hospital where she again spoke to the police about the incident. She was treated for lacerations of her right hand, and a rape kit was obtained. Medications including Valium and Doxycyclin were prescribed. Mr.

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

Related

Caple v. Bullard Restaurants, Inc.
567 S.E.2d 828 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2002)
Cialino v. Wal-Mart Stores
577 S.E.2d 345 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2003)
Russell v. Lowes Product Distribution
425 S.E.2d 454 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1993)
Robbins v. Nicholson
188 S.E.2d 350 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1972)
Hauser v. Advanced Plastiform, Inc.
514 S.E.2d 545 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1999)
Kiger v. Bahnson Service Company
133 S.E.2d 702 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1963)
Wake County Hospital System, Inc. v. Safety National Casualty Corp.
487 S.E.2d 789 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1997)
Phillips v. U.S. Air, Inc.
463 S.E.2d 259 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1995)
Culpepper v. Fairfield Sapphire Valley
377 S.E.2d 777 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1989)
Dildy v. MBW Investments, Inc.
566 S.E.2d 759 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2002)
Baysden v. State
718 S.E.2d 699 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2011)
Mills v. State
33 S.E.2d 702 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1945)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Archie v. Old Salem Tavern, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/archie-v-old-salem-tavern-ncworkcompcom-2004.