Avery v. Phelps Chevrolet

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedFebruary 17, 2005
DocketI.C. NOS. 623408 962716.
StatusPublished

This text of Avery v. Phelps Chevrolet (Avery v. Phelps Chevrolet) 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
Avery v. Phelps Chevrolet, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2005).

Opinions

***********
Upon review of the competent evidence of record with reference to the errors assigned, and finding no good grounds to receive further evidence or to rehear the parties or their representatives, the Full Commission reverses the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner.

***********
The Full Commission finds as fact and concludes as matters of law the following which were entered into by the parties in a Pre-Trial Agreement and at the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner as:

STIPULATIONS
1. All parties are properly before the North Carolina Industrial Commission, and the North Carolina Industrial Commission has jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject matter of this action.

2. All parties have been correctly designated, and that there is no question as to misjoinder or nonjoinder of parties.

3. On or about January 3, 1996 and May 26, 1999 Defendant-Employer employer employed more than three (3) employees, and the parties were bound by and subject to the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

4. On or about January 3, 1996 and May 26, 1999 an employee-employer relationship existed between Plaintiff and Defendant-Employer.

5. On or about January 3, 1996 and May 26, 1999 Defendant-Employer was self-insured with claims administered through Sedgwick CMS, Inc.

6. On or about January 3, 1996, Plaintiff was employed by Defendant-Employer at an average weekly wage of $698.06, which yields a compensation rate of $465.40.

7. On or about May 26, 1999, Plaintiff was employed by Defendant-Employer at an average weekly wage of $884.80, which yields a compensation rate of $589.87.

8. On or about January 3, 1996, Plaintiff sustained a compensable injury by accident to his right shoulder. On or about May 26, 1999, Plaintiff sustained a compensable injury by accident and/or aggravation of a pre-existing condition to his arm and shoulder as set forth in the Form 18 filed by Plaintiff on August 31, 1999 and the Form 60 filed by Defendant-Employers on June 27, 2001.

9. Plaintiff has a claim for bilateral carpal tunnel with Industrial Commission File Number 208976 for an injury by accident and/or occupational disease sustained on or about December 13, 2001 that is not being litigated at this time.

10. Plaintiff continues to work for Defendant-Employer.

11. Plaintiff received weekly temporary total disability benefits in the amount of $465.40 from April 23, 1996 through May 26, 1996; from August 27, 1997 through February 12, 1998; from January 15, 1999 through May 16, 1999; and for February 4, 2002 as a result of his injury by accident; as well as temporary partial disability benefits from May 31, 1996 through June 6, 1996 and 48 weeks of permanent partial disability benefits pursuant to a Form 26 approved by the Commission on July 18, 2001.

12. In addition, the parties stipulated into evidence the following: (a) an indexed packet of documents which includes medical records and Industrial Commission Forms; and (b) additional medical records submitted after the hearing on June 4, 2002, August 9, 2002, September 13, 2002 and October 18, 2002.

***********
Based on the foregoing stipulations and the evidence presented, the Full Commission makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. As of the date of hearing before the deputy commissioner, Plaintiff was forty-six years old, with a date of birth of 23 December 1954. He has a high school diploma. Plaintiff began working for Defendant-Employer in 1987 as a mechanic.

2. Plaintiff's job duties as a mechanic included performing any kind of mechanical work. He testified that his duties included a lot of heavy lifting, pushing, pulling, climbing and crawling.

3. On January 3, 1996, Plaintiff was working on a Chevrolet Camaro with a trainee, who was unable to connect a fuel evaporator line on the back of the gas tank. Plaintiff stepped onto a stool to help the trainee. When he stepped down from the stool, Plaintiff stepped awkwardly onto a plastic shield, which was on the floor. He fell backward onto his back, right shoulder and right side of his neck on a concrete pillar, which was raised approximately five inches off of the floor. Immediately, Plaintiff experienced pain in his back, right shoulder and entire right side. He was unable to move his shoulder.

4. Plaintiff was taken to Med Center One, where the medical staff took x-rays. Plaintiff's right arm was placed in a sling and he was given pain medication. For six months, Plaintiff continued going to Med Center One for physical therapy; however, Plaintiff continued to feel extreme pain during physical therapy. Med Center One referred Plaintiff to Dr. Steven L. Wooten.

5. Dr. Wooten is a board-certified orthopedist who first saw Plaintiff on March 21, 1996. Plaintiff reported pain in his right shoulder. An MRI was needed, but Plaintiff was too large to fit in the MRI scanner; therefore, an arthrogram was taken. The arthrogram revealed a large rotator cuff tear in the right shoulder. Dr. Wooten performed surgery to repair the rotator cuff tear on April 23, 1996.

6. Plaintiff's injury to his right shoulder was accepted as compensable and he was paid temporary total disability in the amount of $465.40 beginning on April 23, 1996.

7. The issue before the Full Commission is whether plaintiff's cervical spine problems are causally related to his compensable injury of January 3, 1996.

8. On May 3, 1996, Plaintiff's right shoulder was improving, but he complained to Dr. Wooten of bruising and tenderness in his neck. Dr. Wooten noted a palpable cord along Plaintiff's back where he had undergone an interscalene block at the time of his surgery to decrease the amount of pain after surgery. On May 24, 1996, Plaintiff reported tightness in his neck. As a result of Plaintiff's complaints, Dr. Wooten believed that Plaintiff's neck problem was not totally resolved. Dr. Wooten recommended that Plaintiff not use his right hand and that he should keep it in a sling while at work.

9. On June 21, 1996, Plaintiff's neurological exam was normal. On July 22, 1996, Plaintiff was improving, but felt something moving in his shoulder. He continued to have pain in his right shoulder. Dr. Wooten believed that Plaintiff might have a cervical disc problem due to the radiation of pain from his neck into his right arm. On September 30, 1996 and November 1, 1996, Plaintiff continued to complain of burning pain in his neck, shoulder, forearm and occasionally, his fingers. On December 12, 1996, Plaintiff complained that the pain in his right neck and shoulder had increased.

10. By January 24, 1997, the pain had spread from Plaintiff's right neck and shoulder to his right ear. On that date, Plaintiff received an injection to his shoulder and an MRI was scheduled for his cervical spine. Again, Plaintiff was unable to fit in the MRI scan due to the width of his shoulders. An arthrogram taken on March 14, 1997 identified a persistent or recurrent rotator cuff tear in Plaintiff's right shoulder. Dr. Wooten referred Plaintiff to Dr. William J. Mallon.

11. Dr. Mallon is board-certified in orthopedics and has a sub-specialty in shoulder and elbow surgery. He treated plaintiff from September 19, 1997 to June 12, 2001. On September 19, 1997, Dr. Mallon indicated in his medical notes that plaintiff had already had a workup on his neck and had received a nerve block in his neck with no significant relief.

12. On August 27, 1997, Dr. Mallon performed surgery for Plaintiff's torn rotator cuff.

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

Related

§ 97-2
North Carolina § 97-2(6)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Avery v. Phelps Chevrolet, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/avery-v-phelps-chevrolet-ncworkcompcom-2005.