Dalkas v. Interior Wood Specialties

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedJune 19, 1999
DocketI.C. Nos. 600129, 605866.
StatusPublished

This text of Dalkas v. Interior Wood Specialties (Dalkas v. Interior Wood Specialties) 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
Dalkas v. Interior Wood Specialties, (N.C. Super. Ct. 1999).

Opinion

The Full Commission has reviewed this matter based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Theresa B. Stephenson and the briefs and arguments on appeal. The appealing party has not shown good ground to receive further evidence or to amend the holding of prior Opinion and Award. However, pursuant to its authority under G.S. § 97-85, the Full Commission modifies in part and affirms in part the Deputy Commissioner's decision and enters the following Opinion and Award.

***********

The Full Commission finds as fact and concludes as matters of law the following, which were entered into by the parties at the hearing on 26 September 1997 and subsequent thereto as:

STIPULATIONS
1. All parties are properly before the North Carolina Industrial Commission and are subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

2. An employment relationship existed between plaintiff-employee and defendant-employer IBM on 14 March 1995. At that time Liberty Mutual Insurance Company was the carrier on risk.

3. An employment relationship existed between plaintiff-employee and defendant-employer Interior Wood Specialties on 28 September 1995. At that time defendant Interior Wood Specialties (hereinafter referred to as "Interior Wood") was self-insured with North Carolina Forestry Association as the administrator.

4. Plaintiff's average weekly wage while working for defendant-employer IBM on 14 March 1995 is to be determined by an Industrial Commission Form 22, admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #5.

5. Plaintiff's average weekly wage while working for defendant-employer Interior Wood on 28 September 1995 is to be determined by an Industrial Commission Form 22, received at the Commission following the hearing on 26 September 1997.

6. The Pre-Trial Agreement between plaintiff and defendants IBM and Liberty Mutual is admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #1A.

7. The Pre-Trial Agreement between plaintiff and defendants Interior Wood and Aegis is admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #1B.

8. The Industrial Commission Form 19 with respect to defendant-employer Interior Wood and the Form 19 with respect to defendant-employer IBM are admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #2.

9. Defendant-employer Interior Wood's Register History is admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #3.

10. A statement of plaintiff's earnings while working for defendant-employer IBM is admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #4.

11. The Industrial Commission Form 22 for defendant-employer IBM is admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #5.

12. Stipulated Exhibit #6 includes a letter from Cathleen Swords to Dr. Ronald Epner and two (2) pages of medical restrictions.

13. Plaintiff's Responses to defendants IBM's and Liberty Mutual's Interrogatories are admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #7.

14. Plaintiff's Responses to defendants Interior Wood's and Aegis' interrogatories are admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #8.

15. Defendant-employer IBM's Medical History Sheets, dated 19 October 1994 through 12 February 1996, are admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #9.

16. The parties' Stipulated Exhibit #10, submitted after the hearing, was introduced at the hearing and admitted as part of Stipulated Exhibit #6.

17. Plaintiff's records from Bull City Rehabilitation Associates, P. A., dated 31 May 1995 through 12 June 1995 are admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #11.

18. Correspondence from Kathy Baughman, defendant-carrier, and Dr. Ronald Epner and Dr. Brett Hynninnen is admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #12.

19. A letter from New England Medical Center to plaintiff's counsel is admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #13.

20. The issues to be determined are whether the plaintiff suffers from a compensable injury or occupational disease as the result of her work with either of the defendant-employers, and if so, to what benefits is he entitled, if any?

RULINGS ON EVIDENTIARY MATTERS
The objections contained within the depositions of Dr. James Urbaniak, Dr. Stephen Shaffer, Dr. Charles Cassidy, Dr. Ronald Epner, James E. Seitz, David Pridgen and David Savage are ruled upon in accordance with the applicable provisions of the law and the Opinion and Award in this case.

Based upon the evidence of record, the Full Commission makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On 14 March 1995, plaintiff was a 46-year old male employed by defendant-employer IBM as a computer assembler. Plaintiff began working in this temporary, full-time position in September 1994. This position also involved frequent overtime hours.

2. Plaintiff's job duties at IBM as a computer assembler required him to push and pound together computer parts using his left hand. Some computer parts required extra pushing and pounding, occasionally leaving plaintiff's hands swollen and discolored.

3. Plaintiff assembled up to forty (40) computers within an eight (8) hour work day. Each computer required ten to twenty (10-20) pushing or pounding motions. The type of part called "sloop five by five" was especially difficult to assemble.

4. In March 1995 plaintiff began to feel a sharp pain in his left wrist. Each time he pushed or pounded on a computer part, the plaintiff felt a stabbing pain up his arm. The pain increased when plaintiff's use of his hand increased.

5. Plaintiff first sought treatment on 14 April 1995 from IBM's Occupational Health Service. Dr. Pizzino, at IBM, gave plaintiff pain relievers, splint and plaintiff work restrictions of no bending his left wrist, back, avoid using left hand or arm with force and no pinching movements with his left hand.

6. Plaintiff worked alternate light duty assignments as a "floater" or substitute line leader, parts carrier and with some computer assembly in April and May 1995. Although plaintiff's left hand improved somewhat with light duty, he continued to have stabbing pains, burning, numbness and weakness.

7. On 31 May 1995 defendant-employer IBM referred plaintiff to Dr. Brett Hynninen who diagnosed plaintiff with avascular necrosis of the left scaphoid. Plaintiff was limited to no repetitive flexion/extension of the left wrist, and no gripping, pinching or twisting of the wrist.

8. In late May 1995, plaintiff met with his supervisor and an IBM nurse concerning light duty work. Bob Paschall, a manager with defendant-employer IBM, attempted to find duties for plaintiff which would not strain plaintiff's wrist. However, plaintiff had already attempted working with these types of duties and had experienced a worsening of his left hand. Therefore, plaintiff was justified in refusing these light duties from defendant-employer IBM.

9. Plaintiff sought treatment from Dr. Ronald Epner on 15 June 1995 upon referral. Dr. Epner diagnosed plaintiff with osteonecrosis (or avascular necrosis) of the left scaphoid and removed plaintiff from work for two (2) weeks. Avascular necrosis is a condition where the bone dies due to lack of blood supply. When the scaphoid bone is involved, the other bones in the wrist become involved as the original bone dies. This causes the entire wrist to become painful. Osteonecrosis of the scaphoid is a progressive disorder involving death of the bone and collapse with increasing pain and increasing dysfunction of the wrist. Plaintiff has the type of osteonecrosis where no prior fracture of the bone occurred.

10. The records as to plaintiff's last day at IBM are contradictory.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Dalkas v. Interior Wood Specialties, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dalkas-v-interior-wood-specialties-ncworkcompcom-1999.