Cordaro v. Jack Gray Transport

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedJuly 8, 2005
DocketI.C. NO. 683517.
StatusPublished

This text of Cordaro v. Jack Gray Transport (Cordaro v. Jack Gray Transport) 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
Cordaro v. Jack Gray Transport, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2005).

Opinion

***********
The Full Commission has reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Chief Deputy Commissioner Gheen and the briefs and oral arguments on appeal. The appealing party has not shown good grounds to reconsider the evidence, receive further evidence or to amend the prior Opinion and Award. Accordingly, the Full Commission affirms and adopts the Deputy Commissioner's holding and enters the following Opinion and Award.

***********
The Full Commission finds as fact and concludes as a matter of law the following, which were entered into by the parties at hearing as:

STIPULATIONS
1. All parties are properly before the North Carolina Industrial Commission (hereinafter "Industrial Commission"), and this is the Court of proper jurisdiction for this action.

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

3. The parties were subject to, and bound by, the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act (hereinafter "Act").

4. At all relevant times, an employment relationship existed between the parties.

5. Cambridge Integrated Services was formerly the administrative agency, but the North Carolina Insurance Guaranty Fund is now the administrative agency.

6. Cordaro's average weekly wage is $605.50, yielding a weekly compensation rate of $403.65.

7. Cordaro's alleged dates of injury are June 7, 1996 and December 6, 1996.

***********
Based upon the entire evidence of record, the Full Commission enters the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On the date of the hearing, Cordaro was fifty-seven years old.

2. Cordaro completed a sixth grade education and received a GED. Cordaro has no special skills or licenses other than those discussed hereinafter. Jack Gray Transport (defendants collectively hereinafter "JGT") hired Cordaro in October 1993. With JGT, Cordaro worked as a garbage truck driver and was so employed on the dates of his injuries by accident.

3. Prior to his employment with JGT, Cordaro had significant preexisting conditions in several body parts, but no medical problems that kept him from performing the full duties of competitive employment. Cordaro has a good employment history of working throughout his life.

4. On or about June 7, 1996, Cordaro sustained an injury when he fell, dislocating his shoulder. This injury improved with conservative treatment.

5. On or about December 6, 1996, Cordaro sustained an injury when he slipped on mud and fell. As a result, Cordaro suffered multiple injuries to his back, hip, ankle and knees. His hip injuries required surgical correction.

6. In 1997 while participating in a vocational rehabilitation program in Winston-Salem, Cordaro sustained an injury to his right ankle during a treadmill exercise. This injury required surgery to remove bone chips from Cordaro's right ankle.

7. JGT accepted Cordaro's accidents as compensable and paid benefits, including weekly disability benefits, through the date of the hearing.

8. Dr. Vincent E. Paul (hereinafter "Dr. Paul") began treating Cordaro on December 27, 1996 and has examined and treated Cordaro on over twenty occasions between December 1996 and the date of the hearing. Dr. Paul diagnosed Cordaro with bilateral knee degenerative joint disease with synovitis, a labral hip tear, S1 degenerative disc disease in the low back, an osteoarthritic ankle, and a fused foot.

9. Dr. Paul has consistently imposed significant work restrictions on Cordaro. Most recently, Dr. Paul restricted Cordaro to light-duty work only with no truck driving, welding, loading, stooping, or bending. Cordaro is confined to work while sitting that requires Cordaro to elevate his leg and change positions due to his sciatica, hip and ankle problems.

10. Cordaro attempted to return to employment after he was initially released to return to work on September 24, 1997 and began work as a sanitation truck driver in Kernersville. The job increased Cordaro's pain and, after two weeks, Dr. Paul removed Cordaro from work due to the pain Cordaro experienced while driving the truck and climbing in and out of the cab.

11. Cordaro has not returned to any employment since October 1997.

12. Cordaro attempted self-directed efforts to retain himself for employment. He applied for and received a Pell Grant for continuing education, which he used for HVAC and welding training. Dr. Paul believes Cordaro is physically unable to perform HVAC or welding work, but could conceivably serve as a welding instructor. No teaching positions materialized.

13. Cordaro attempted retraining in computer technology by entering formal classes in their use. JGT refused to authorize continuing education in this endeavor despite the fact that Sharol Siler, MRC, CRC, (hereinafter "Siler"), the vocational rehabilitation consultant assigned to Cordaro by JGT, found Cordaro willing and cooperative in this effort.

14. Dr. Paul finds Cordaro has reached maximum medical improvement, and that his conditions are more likely than not permanent.

15. Dr. Paul's testimony is uncontradicted that Cordaro will retain significant physical limitations under optimum circumstances. Dr. Paul, realizing these limitations, testified "there would be some efficacy to [performing] a functional capacity evaluation, and also to perhaps doing work trial or work reconditioning to get [Cordaro] a certain job." He also testified that it would "be very appropriate" for Cordaro to participate in vocational retraining or vocational rehabilitation to determine what, if any, capabilities Cordaro has to return to work.

16. Siler testified that Cordaro was unable to return to his pre-injury employment. Her testimony also confirms that Cordaro's restriction to light-duty work means that he has minimal transferable skills from his prior experience in medium to heavy work.

17. Goodwill Industries assessed Cordaro's ability to return to sustained gainful employment in the competitive market and identified some possible employments. However, Goodwill Industries did not have access to a comprehensive physical residual functional capacity examination.

18. Cordaro testified that he is willing to undertake retraining to determine if he can achieve suitable employment in the competitive workforce consistent with his obvious physical restrictions.

19. Both Dr. Paul's and Siler's testimony as to Cordaro's residual functional capacity were made without benefit of a thorough functional capacity examination. Additionally, Siler did not have the benefit of Dr. Paul's extensive testimony in preparing the reports appended to her testimony or in presenting her testimony.

20. JGT has produced no evidence, and does not contend, that Cordaro is currently capable of suitable employment. The greater weight of the evidence clearly establishes that as a result of the compensable injuries by accident suffered by Cordaro on June 7, 1996 and December 6, 1996, combined with his age, education, work experience, current work restrictions and injuries to his shoulder, back, hip, right knee, ankle and foot, Cordaro has been unable to return to and sustain any employment.

21. Siler's final rehabilitation report of March 2004 indicates no open jobs in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles (DOT) within Cordaro's work restrictions. Siler recommended no vocational placement for Cordaro and did not identify any job in any exertional level currently open and available to Cordaro.

22.

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

Related

Kisiah v. W.R. Kisiah Plumbing, Inc.
476 S.E.2d 434 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1996)
Russell v. Lowes Product Distribution
425 S.E.2d 454 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1993)
Little v. Penn Ventilator Co.
345 S.E.2d 204 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1986)
Saums v. Raleigh Community Hospital
487 S.E.2d 746 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Cordaro v. Jack Gray Transport, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cordaro-v-jack-gray-transport-ncworkcompcom-2005.