Beddingfield v. Henderson Company

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedApril 25, 1995
DocketI.C. No. 766323
StatusPublished

This text of Beddingfield v. Henderson Company (Beddingfield v. Henderson Company) 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
Beddingfield v. Henderson Company, (N.C. Super. Ct. 1995).

Opinion

The undersigned have reviewed the Award based upon the record of the proceedings before the Deputy Commissioner.

The appealing party has shown good grounds to reconsider the evidence. However, upon reconsideration of the evidence, the undersigned reach the same facts and conclusions as those reached by the Deputy Commissioner. Neither party here requested the Full Commission to receive further evidence or to rehear the parties or their representatives. The Full Commission, in their discretion, have determined that there are no good grounds in this case to receive further evidence or to rehear the parties or their representatives, as sufficient convincing evidence exists in the record to support their findings of fact, conclusions of law, and ultimate award.

The undersigned find as fact and conclude as matters of law the following, which were entered into by the parties at the hearing, and in Industrial Commission Form 21, approved by the Industrial Commission on December 28, 1987, and in a Pre-Trial Agreement dated July 9, 1993, as

STIPULATIONS

1. At the time of the injury giving rise to this claim, the parties were subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

2. At such time, an employment relationship existed between plaintiff and defendant-employer.

3. Defendant-employer is self-insured, with Sedgwick James of the Carolinas acting as servicing agent.

4. Plaintiff's average weekly wage was $250.38, yielding a compensation rate of $166.93.

5. On October 30, 1987, plaintiff sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of her employment with defendant-employer.

6. Temporary total disability has been paid to plaintiff from November 2, 1987 to the present time.

7. Plaintiff's medical and vocational records, which are attached to the depositions taken in this matter, are stipulated into evidence.

RULINGS ON EVIDENTIARY MATTERS

The objections raised by counsel at the depositions of Dr. Todd Chapman, Dr. Robert Francis, Stephen Carpenter and Ann Archer are ruled upon in accordance with the applicable provisions of the law and the Opinion and Award in this case.

* * * * * * * * * * *

The Full Commission adopt as their own all findings of fact found by the Deputy Commissioner, with minor technical modifications, as follows:

Based upon the competent and convincing evidence adduced at the hearing, the undersigned make the following additional

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. At the time of the injury giving rise to this claim, the plaintiff was 60 years old. She is a high school graduate and completed nurses aid training in 1968. Based on achievement tests, plaintiff has good reading skills, but scored at the marginal level in spelling and illiterate level in arithmetic.

2. Plaintiff worked as a nurses aide at Margaret Pardee Hospital from 1968 until 1974. She began working for defendant-employer as a community health assistant in November, 1974.

3. On October 30, 1987, plaintiff sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of her employment with defendant-employer when she pulled on a sticking desk drawer, which fell out and caused her to fall from the chair onto the floor. As a result of this accident, plaintiff sustained injuries to her left shoulder and arm, back and head.

4. After the accident, plaintiff saw Dr. Robert Francis, an orthopaedic surgeon, who initially examined her on November 5, 1987. As a consequence of the stipulated accident, plaintiff sustained muscle spasm in the cervical spine and trapezius muscle and possible compression fractures at L1. Dr. Francis also found that plaintiff had pre-existing cervical spondylosis and that she had undergone a laminectomy at L4-5 and L5-S1 prior to the injury by accident.

5. After treating plaintiff for several months, Dr. Francis referred plaintiff to Dr. Todd Chapman, an orthopaedic surgeon, who first examined plaintiff on January 13, 1988. On June 10, 1988, Dr. Chapman performed a posterior lumbar interbody fusion at L4-5 and L5-S1.

6. After surgery, plaintiff continued to experience pain in her lower back and right leg and was treated by Dr. Francis and Dr. Chapman. On August 17, 1989, Dr. Chapman saw plaintiff for increasing back problems after she bent over and experienced a catch in her back. X-rays showed a solid fusion at L4-5 and L5-S1, but indicated a degenerative disc at L3-4. The L3-4 problem was caused by degenerative disc disease, but the injury by accident and subsequent fusion surgery aggravated or exacerbated the symptoms that plaintiff would have experienced at L3-4. There is sufficient convincing evidence of record to support this finding of fact.

7. Plaintiff subsequently began experiencing numbness in her left hand and pain in her left wrist which were caused by rotary subluxation of the scaphoid and carpel tunnel syndrome. Dr. Francis performed a left carpel tunnel release on February 8, 1989. There is insufficient convincing evidence in the record from which to prove by its greater weight that plaintiff's problems with her left hand and wrist were related to the injury by accident, since plaintiff fell on her right hand.

8. As a result of the injury by accident, plaintiff underwent surgery by Dr. Donald D'Alessandro for rotator cuff repair to her left shoulder on October 2, 1990.

9. Plaintiff continued to experience low back pain and right leg pain and numbness. She underwent various types of treatment including epidural steroid injections, physical therapy, prescription medications, and the use of different types of back braces. On January 4, 1992, plaintiff was released by Dr. Chapman to return to work with restrictions of no lifting over thirty-five pounds, no repetitive lifting, no twisting, pushing, pulling, climbing or prolonged sitting or standing.

10. Plaintiff next saw Dr. Chapman on November 18, 1992, when she was experiencing increased pain in her right leg. She was unable to drive a car and was restricted from all work because of the instability with her right leg giving way and causing her to fall.

11. Defendant-employer has not offered plaintiff any work which is within her capacity to earn wages. However, defendant-employer has provided vocational rehabilitation assistance to plaintiff. An Ergos evaluation done at Thoms Hospital and a functional capacity evaluation performed by Astro Rehabilitation Center, both done in March of 1993, showed that plaintiff had an ability for less than full range of sedentary work.

12. In September, 1993, the vocational rehabilitation coordinator located a telemarketing job which was offered to plaintiff. This job description was approved by Dr. Chapman. Plaintiff refused to accept the telemarketing job due to the commuting distance from her home in Zirconia to the Asheville job site since she is unable to drive, and the prolonged sitting and standing required by the job. In the opinion of the undersigned, plaintiff justifiably refused this offered position, which was not suitable to her capacity to earn wages.

13. Plaintiff continues to experience increased pain from the cervical spondylosis condition which existed prior to the injury by accident. However, there is insufficient convincing evidence of record from which to prove by its greater weight that plaintiff's neck condition was caused by the injury by accident.

14. As a result of the stipulated injury by accident, plaintiff has a thirty-five percent permanent functional impairment of her back. She also has a five percent permanent functional impairment of her shoulder as a result of the injury by accident.

15. Plaintiff has not reached the end of the healing period which resulted from the accident on October 30, 1987.

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

Related

Bridges v. Linn-Corriher Corp.
368 S.E.2d 388 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1988)
Whitley v. Columbia Lumber Mfg. Co.
348 S.E.2d 336 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Beddingfield v. Henderson Company, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beddingfield-v-henderson-company-ncworkcompcom-1995.