Baldwin v. Citation Foundry Service

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedFebruary 27, 2002
DocketI.C. NO. 061176
StatusPublished

This text of Baldwin v. Citation Foundry Service (Baldwin v. Citation Foundry Service) 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
Baldwin v. Citation Foundry Service, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2002).

Opinion

***********
This case was heard before Deputy Commissioner Edward Garner, Jr. in Concord, North Carolina, on January 22, 2001. At the hearing, defense counsel admitted that plaintiff suffered a compensable injury by accident to his back. The medical evidence further established that Dr. James E. Rice, MD, had treated plaintiff and indicated by report dated December 27, 2000, that a delay in plaintiff's having epidural injections could result in significant complications. Therefore, by order dated March 21, 2001, Deputy Commissioner Garner approved the treatment recommended by Dr. Rice.

***********
The Full Commission has reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Garner, supplemented by the deposition and accompanying exhibits of Dr. James E. Rice taken on January 9, 2002, 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. However, based on the January 9, 2002 deposition and exhibits and upon review of the facts certain modifications to the Deputy Commissioner's Opinion and Award are necessary. Accordingly, the Full Commission modifies and affirms the Opinion and Award of Deputy Commissioner Garner.

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

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

2. An employee-employer relationship existed between the plaintiff and the named employer.

3. Plaintiff's average weekly wage is as set forth on the Form 22 (wage chart).

4. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company is the carrier on the risk.

5. Plaintiff is seeking medical treatment and temporary total disability benefits for his compensable injury by accident.

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

FINDINGS OF FACTS
1. On July 10, 2000, plaintiff sustained an injury by accident to his back arising out of and in the course of his employment for which the employer admitted liability at the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner.

2. David Earl Baldwin had been a long-term employee at Citation Foundry Services, Inc. He earned his living swinging a twelve pound sledge hammer, knocking off thirty to thirty-five pound chunks of metal called "gates" or "risings" from castings which moved down an assembly line, picked up the extremely hot, heavy, freshly cast gates with two pairs of gloves and threw them into a metal hopper. He did this work continuously day in and day out. Since 1985 he had quit or been fired on many, many occasions and was always re-hired because of his excellent work record and his ability to perform this extremely heavy manual labor.

3. On July 10, 2000, a thirty-five pound iron casting caught plaintiff's glove and snatched him as he was turning, causing immediate pain to his back and causing him to fall against a hopper. This history is consistent on the medical record noted by Montgomery County Family Care Center (the company doctor) on July 10, 2000, where plaintiff was sent by the employer. Plaintiff was given sedentary restrictions. Later that night Plaintiff went to the Richmond Memorial Hospital emergency room and was taken out of work until July 17, 2000

4. By July 25, 2000, Montgomery County Family Care Center had further restricted plaintiff's sedentary work to no bending, squatting, kneeling, walking, standing, climbing or overhead work. The clinic note of that date notes "Patient's workmen's comp told him to come here today. July 10th pt. caught glove on material he was throwing at work and pulled his back out. Pt. has not worked since that date and has been resting but pain has not gone away. He presents today for evaluation and treatment." Because he was in great pain and reduced to sedentary activity he sought an opinion from Dr. Douglas M. Burch.

5. Dr. Burch first saw plaintiff on July 28, 2000, and an x-ray revealed spondylolysis. The company doctors had prescribed physical therapy without first obtaining proper x-rays, which Dr. Burch felt was so serious that he immediately referred plaintiff to Dr. James E. Rice. On July 31, 2000, Dr. Burch noted "It is my opinion that Mr. Baldwin's severe spinal condition is unstable in nature with probable HNP with spondylo. Advised patient of no work activities until further assessed." Dr. Burch also spoke with Robin Marsh, the physical therapist in Mt. Gilead, and advised her that the simple diagnosis of low back pain was incorrect and advised her of true diagnosis and advised her of this consult. Dr. Rice's follow-up evaluation of September 20, 2000 verifies Dr. Burch's assessment of spondylolysis.

6. Dr. Rice recommended epidural injections and absolutely no work until the injury was treated. Dr. Rice's medical records reflect:

I really think with his continued symptoms and lack of response to oral steroids an epidural steroid injection is a very good way to try and get him better without having to resort to surgical intervention. I would strongly encourage his carrier to authorize this so we can try and get him back to work activities. Follow up in 4 weeks. No work in the interim.

As before I think further procrastination over the epidural steroid injection only prolongs his chance of getting back quickly to a more functional level. There is also a very good chance that if he does not get better he is looking at having to go for an extensive spinal fusion to correct his problem. Hopefully he will be able to get the epidural steroid injection done expeditiously and get back to a more functional status.

7. Dr. Rice kept plaintiff out of work the entire period of time beginning with plaintiff's first visit September 20, 2000.

8. Deputy Commissioner Ed Garner in open court stated "Here's what I'm inclined to rule — specific traumatic incident on July 10, return to light duty, he was discharged — company procedure . . ." It was apparent to Deputy Commissioner Garner as it is apparent from the records that plaintiff had been engaged in heavy physical labor, was in excellent physical condition, hurt himself on the job and was in significant pain secondary to the accident according to the medical records.

Now if you want to — if you want to question the doctor in the meantime, I'll certainly allow that, but do it pretty quickly, if you want to depose him and ask any questions regarding causal connection. If I see a healthy person lifting a jackhammer, then has an incident and has problems, and the doctor is saying he needs some treatment, it's sort of obvious that it's related. Unless you get a blazing gun or something to show that it's not related, it looks like it is.

9. Deputy Commissioner Garner thus advised defense counsel that should defense counsel desire to challenge Dr. Rice's opinion, he needed to go ahead and schedule the deposition of Dr. Rice. Defendant did not schedule the deposition testimony of Dr. Rice. The medical records of Montgomery County Family Care Center, Richmond Memorial Hospital emergency room, Dr. Burch and Dr.

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

Related

Church v. Baxter Travenol Laboratories, Inc.
409 S.E.2d 715 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1991)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Baldwin v. Citation Foundry Service, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baldwin-v-citation-foundry-service-ncworkcompcom-2002.