Bell v. Perdue Farms, Incorporated

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedSeptember 18, 1998
DocketI.C. NO. 460796
StatusPublished

This text of Bell v. Perdue Farms, Incorporated (Bell v. Perdue Farms, Incorporated) 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
Bell v. Perdue Farms, Incorporated, (N.C. Super. Ct. 1998).

Opinion

Upon review of all the competent evidence of record with reference to the errors assigned, and finding no good ground to reconsider the evidence, receive further evidence, or to rehear the parties or their representatives, the Full Commission AFFIRMS and ADOPTS with minor modifications the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner as follows:

The Full Commission finds as facts and concludes as matter of law the following which were entered into by the parties in a Pre-Trial Order, dated November 19, 1996, and at the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner as:

STIPULATIONS
1. Plaintiff was employed by defendant-employer at all relevant times.

2. All parties are bound by and subject to the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

3. An employee-employer relationship existed between plaintiff and defendant-employer at all relevant times.

4. Plaintiff timely filed an Industrial Commission Form 18 and there are no questions of statute of limitation, timeliness or jurisdiction.

5. At all relevant times, plaintiff earned an average weekly wage of $266.00.

6. The parties stipulated into evidence without further authentication or verification as Exhibit 1 the following 176 pages of documents:

— Perdue Medical Documents;

— Roanoke-Chowan Hospital records;

— Physical Therapy Progress notes;

— Dr. Leonard Reaves records;

— Bertie Rural Health records;

— East Carolina Neurology records;

— Southeastern Neurology records;

— Dr. Thomas Gualtieri records;

— Maryview Clinic records;

— Vocational Rehabilitation records;

— Pitt Memorial Hospital records;

— Pitt Chronic Pain Evaluation records; and,

— Responses to Interrogatories.

*************
RULINGS ON EVIDENTIARY MATTERS
All objections raised during the deposition of Dr. Thomas Gualtieri are ruled upon in accordance with the law and Opinion and Award rendered in this matter.

*************
Based upon the competent evidence of record herein, the Full Commission adopts the Findings of Fact of the deputy commissioner with minor modifications and finds as follows:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. At the time of the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner, plaintiff was a thirty-six year old woman, born April 29, 1960 and holding a high school degree. Prior to beginning work with defendant-employer, plaintiff primarily engaged in farming activities with her parents. On July 24, 1983, plaintiff became employed with defendant-employer as a poultry processor in its Lewiston facility.

2. On May 18, 1994, plaintiff was working in the Weldotron department where trays of chicken are wrapped in cellophane by machine. On that day she was holding trays of drumsticks in her hand. As she was walking forward, she tripped on a basket and landed on her left side, hitting the right side of her head on the concrete floor. Plaintiff was wearing a hard hat at the time.

3. Plaintiff was immediately taken to the Roanoke-Chowan Hospital Emergency Room. Plaintiff reported that she had fallen, hitting her left side and the right side of her head. Medical records indicated that plaintiff had not lost consciousness as a result of the fall, but had a headache and was complaining of pain in her left leg and left rib area. On that day x-rays were taken of plaintiff's chest, left ribs and cervical spine. These x-rays were negative. Plaintiff was given Motrin and released.

4. On May 19, 1994, plaintiff presented to Dr. Robert B. Hansen, a neurologist, complaining of a bruised rib cage area, and Dr. Hansen confirmed that plaintiff had a bruise on the left side of her chest just below her armpit. At that time plaintiff did not complain of any head pain. Dr. Hansen kept plaintiff out of work for a couple of days for her soft tissue bruise to her left rib area and allowed her to return to work on Monday.

5. Plaintiff wanted another opinion regarding her ability to return to work and on May 24, 1994 presented to Dr. Leonard Reaves III of Cashie Medical Center in Windsor. Plaintiff presented complaining of pain in the left side of her chest as well as neck and right shoulder pain resulting from her fall at work on May 18, 1994. Dr. Reeves continued plaintiff on Motrin and released the plaintiff to return to work at light duty for one week to ten days. Plaintiff was directed to avoid bending, stooping, lifting and pulling. Plaintiff did not complain of head pain.

6. On May 25, 1994 plaintiff returned to light duty work for defendant-employer.

7. On June 14, 1994 and June 28, 1994, plaintiff reported to defendant-employer's Wellness Center complaining of headaches. This was plaintiff's first mention of head pain since the date of her fall. As a result of these complaints, plaintiff was examined by Dr. Colin Jones and returned to work. A CT scan of plaintiff's head was taken on June 29, 1994 and was normal.

8. Plaintiff's complaints of headaches persisted, and on July 13, 1994, plaintiff saw Dr. Brenda Waller, a physiatrist at the Rehabilitation Clinic of Pitt Regional Hospital. Plaintiff presented to Dr. Waller complaining of pain occasionally in her left side, low back pain, neck pain and constant left-sided head pain. At that time plaintiff reported that immediately following her fall on May 18, 1994, she could not move, started shaking and could not open her eyes; however, she did not lose consciousness, did not experience vomiting or nausea and did not initially suffer headaches. Plaintiff was diagnosed with post-concussive syndrome and a back strain, was taken out of work to participate in physical therapy and had a Functional Capacity Evaluation. Plaintiff again saw Dr. Waller on August 3, 1994, continuing to complain of headaches and left side pain and was continued on daily physical therapy with myofascial release techniques to prevent tension headaches.

9. Plaintiff returned to Pitt Regional Rehab Clinic on August 24, 1994 and was seen by Dr. John E. Eisele. Plaintiff complained that noise in the work environment bothered her. Since plaintiff had not benefited from three months of five days a week physical therapy, her physical therapy was decreased to three times a week. She was referred for MMPI testing and a psychological evaluation and she was directed to return to work on September 5, 1994, starting at four hours per day. Plaintiff again saw Dr. Eisele on September 14, 1994. Plaintiff had attempted to return to work, but, after two hours, complained of severe headaches and dizziness and left. Dr. Eisele recommended that plaintiff discontinue physical therapy and referred her for a neurological examination.

10. On October 6, 1994, plaintiff was again seen by Dr. Robert Hansen, a neurologist. At that time plaintiff was complaining of low back pain and headaches since her fall in May of 1994. Plaintiff was diagnosed as having post-traumatically activated migraine syndrome, meaning headaches that began after an injury. This is different from post-traumatic headaches, which are headaches that relate to the injury. Plaintiff again saw Dr. Hansen on October 20, 1994 and indicated that she could not return to work due to the noise and stress level at work.

11. Plaintiff was subsequently referred by Dr. Hansen to the Maryview Hospital Headache Management Unit which she entered on January 16, 1995 and from which she was discharged January 20, 1995. Plaintiff was diagnosed with chronic tension headaches and musculoskeletal low back pain.

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

Related

§ 97-1
North Carolina § 97-1
§ 97-2
North Carolina § 97-2(6)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Bell v. Perdue Farms, Incorporated, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bell-v-perdue-farms-incorporated-ncworkcompcom-1998.