Clemons v. Tandem, Inc.

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedJune 25, 2010
DocketI.C. NO. 791725.
StatusPublished

This text of Clemons v. Tandem, Inc. (Clemons v. Tandem, Inc.) 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
Clemons v. Tandem, Inc., (N.C. Super. Ct. 2010).

Opinion

***********
The Full Commission has reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Ledford and the briefs and arguments of the parties. The appealing party has not shown good grounds to reconsider the evidence, receive further evidence, or rehear the parties or their representatives. Having reviewed the competent evidence of record, the Full Commission adopts the Opinion and Award of Deputy Commissioner Ledford with minor modifications.

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

STIPULATIONS
1. The parties were subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act as of the date of Plaintiff's accident. *Page 2

2. The date of the injury which is the subject of this claim is August 21, 2007.

3. On such date the employee-employer relationship existed between the Employee-Plaintiff and the Employer-Defendant.

4. The carrier of workers' compensation insurance in North Carolina for the Employer-Defendant was The PMA Insurance Group.

5. Defendants accepted the compensability of Plaintiff's low back injury on August 21, 2007, pursuant to a Form 60.

6. The Employee-Plaintiff's average weekly wage is $150.39.

7. The parties participated in a mediated settlement conference on December 17, 2008. Defendants have paid the entire mediation fee in the amount of $800.00. Pursuant to Rule 7(c) of the Rules for Mediated Settlement and Neutral Evaluation Conferences of the North Carolina Industrial Commission, Defendants are entitled to a credit in the amount of $400.00 for payment of Plaintiff's share of the mediation costs, and Defendants may withhold funds from any award for this purpose.

***********
STIPULATED EXHIBITS
1. Pre-trial Agreement (Stipulated Exhibit 1).

2. Industrial Commission Pleadings and Forms (Stipulated Exhibit 2).

3. Medical Records (Stipulated Exhibit 3).

***********
As set forth in the Pre-Trial Agreement and in this Opinion and Award, the Commission addresses the following: *Page 3

ISSUES
1. Whether Plaintiff is entitled to ongoing disability compensation?

2. What further medical treatment is reasonably necessary?

3. Whether Defendants are responsible for payment of unpaid medical expenses incurred by Plaintiff for unauthorized care related to her compensable injury?

***********
Based upon all of the competent credible evidence of record, the Full Commission makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Plaintiff was 23 years of age on the date of the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner. She obtained her GED in 2005 and completed one year of college at Roanoke-Chowan Community College in 2005-2006. Plaintiff married in June 2007, and her last name is now Grant.

2. Plaintiff was working for Defendant-Employer at McDonald's first as a cashier, and later doing "prep" work. On August 21, 2007, she went to get lettuce during the lunch rush, and as she was lifting a box, she felt a pull in her lower back.

3. Defendants accepted Plaintiff's claim as compensable pursuant to a Form 60, and initiated payment of indemnity compensation at a rate of $100.27 per week.

4. Plaintiff initially sought treatment with Roanoke Chowan Hospital on August 22, 2007. She was released from the hospital and told to follow-up with a physician if she had ongoing symptoms.

5. Plaintiff thereafter sought treatment with Larabee Chiropractic, beginning on or about August 29, 2007. According to the records, Plaintiff was treated there at least through *Page 4 October 8, 2007. Plaintiff's testimony indicates that this treatment was helpful in providing relief and that Dr. Larabee was responsive to her pain complaints.

6. Defendants sent Plaintiff to Rocky Mount Orthopaedic Sports Medicine, where she was examined by Dr. Greig McAvoy on October 17, 2007. Dr. McAvoy assessed Plaintiff with low back pain for which he found no objective abnormalities and no signs of nerve root irritation or neurologic deficit. He noted that a recent MRI of the lumbar spine was normal except for a small central disk protrusion at L5-S1. Dr. McAvoy released Plaintiff to return to "regular duty without restrictions."

7. On December 11, 2007, Defendants filed a Form 24 Application to Terminate or Suspend Payment of Compensation. The Form 24 Application was denied by Order of Special Deputy Commissioner Keischa Lovelace, filed February 8, 2008.

8. Plaintiff was seen again by Dr. McAvoy on May 6, 2008, at which time his assessment remained low back pain. Dr. McAvoy again reassured Plaintiff that he saw no signs of nerve root irritation. Dr. McAvoy assessed Plaintiff at maximum medical improvement and advised her that weight reduction would be helpful. Dr. McAvoy found no basis for permanent work restrictions although he noted that an initial return to modified duty might be prudent. He recommended that Plaintiff return to work as soon as possible.

9. A subsequent Form 24 was filed by Defendants. On July 10, 2008 Special Deputy Commissioner Boyer filed an Order approving Defendants' Form 24 allowing Defendants to terminate Plaintiff's receipt of indemnity compensation.

10. On November 16, 2007, Plaintiff was examined by Michael Koenig, PA-C, under the direction of Dr. Lawrence Larabee at Northeastern Orthopedics. Defendants did not authorize this visit. The physical exam showed some muscle spasm in the lumbar spine. The *Page 5 diagnosis was lumbar strain and disk herniation. Conservative treatment options, including physical therapy were discussed and recommended.

11. At return visits to Northeastern Orthopedics on December 17, 2007 and January 15, 2008, treatment options were again discussed. Plaintiff was referred to Dr. Chafin for evaluation and possible treatment.

12. Plaintiff did not return to see Dr. Larabee at Northeastern Orthopedics until September 2008. At her visit of September 16, 2008, Plaintiff reported that she did not want surgery and did not want to return to see Dr. Chafin at the Pain Clinic.

13. At Plaintiff's visit of December 15, 2008, Dr. Larabee released Plaintiff to return to work at light duty with lifting restrictions of ten (10) pounds, breaks from sitting or standing every 30 minutes, for one month, pending assessment by a neurosurgeon. Plaintiff was also referred to Dr. Scot Reeg for surgical evaluation.

14. Per Dr. Larabee's testimony, where his practice did not see Plaintiff between January 2008 and September 2008, he can not really address her work restrictions during that time. However, per his testimony, "as far as her work status, I anticipated that she would be in some form of light duty."

15. Plaintiff has been seen on at least two occasions, February 3, 2009 and March 3, 2009, at the orthopaedic practice of Dr. Scot Reeg, on the referral from Dr. Larabee. However, Plaintiff has not actually been seen by Dr. Reeg. Her examinations were conducted by Physician Assistant William S. Payne. Dr.

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

Related

§ 97-2
North Carolina § 97-2(6)
§ 97-29
North Carolina § 97-29

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Clemons v. Tandem, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clemons-v-tandem-inc-ncworkcompcom-2010.