Dean v. Wesleyan Edu. Cen.

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedFebruary 2, 2007
DocketI.C. NOS. 427913, 431778
StatusPublished

This text of Dean v. Wesleyan Edu. Cen. (Dean v. Wesleyan Edu. Cen.) 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
Dean v. Wesleyan Edu. Cen., (N.C. Super. Ct. 2007).

Opinion

* * * * * * * * * * *
Upon review of the competent evidence of record with reference to the errors assigned, and finding no good grounds to reconsider the evidence, receive further evidence or to rehear the parties or their representatives, the Full Commission affirms with some modifications the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner.

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

STIPULATIONS
1. All parties are properly before the North Carolina Industrial Commission and the Industrial Commission has jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject matter of this case. All the parties are bound by and subject to the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act. All parties have been correctly designated and there is no question as to the misjoinder or nonjoinder of any party.

2. An employer-employee relationship existed between Plaintiff and Defendant-Employer at all relevant times herein.

3. Defendant-Employer was insured by Isurity Insurance Services with workers' compensation coverage at all relevant times herein.

4. Plaintiff's medical records were stipulated into evidence at the hearing, and the deposition of Dr. Mark J. Warburton taken on February 1, 2006, was timely received into evidence.

5. Plaintiff's average weekly wage was $316.40 per week, yielding a compensation rate of $210.95 per week at all relevant times herein.

6. The issues to be decided from this hearing are the following:

a. Whether Plaintiff sustained an injury by accident while in the course and scope of her employment with Defendant-Employer on April 7, 2004 and/or April 27, 2004?

b. If so, what, if any, benefits is Plaintiff entitled to recovery under the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act?

c. Have Defendants unreasonably defended the claim?

* * * * * * * * * * *
EXHIBITS
The following documents were admitted into evidence as exhibits:

a) Stipulation #1, Plaintiff's medical records;

b) Stipulation #2, Plaintiff's medical records;

c) Stipulation #3, Videotapes of May 21 and 22, 2004, and May 29, 2004.

* * * * * * * * * * *
Based on the foregoing Stipulations and the evidence presented, the Full Commission makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. At the time of hearing before the Deputy Commissioner, Plaintiff was 56 years old, having been born on December 12, 1949. Following a career working as a nurses aide out of high school, a receptionist in the emergency room, and the operator of a licensed, home daycare, Plaintiff applied to work with Defendant-Employer in February 1999. When she interviewed for a job as a teaching assistant, she presented a history of fibromyalgia and was walking with a cane. The director told Plaintiff that she had a very good outlook on working with children and would probably do "as good a job or better than some folks who didn't have to use a cane." Plaintiff was very motivated to work and did not let her history of arthritis and fibromyalgia, which was diagnosed in the late 1980's and caused muscle pain throughout her body, bother her because she enjoyed her work.

2. Plaintiff was hired to be an assistant teacher in the preschool department and established an excellent attendance record. She worked continuously from February 1999 until April 2004, except for a brief period in 2000, when she elected to have knee replacement surgery, which was unrelated to her work. Following the surgery she was out of work for about 6 weeks and may have used a cane for a short time thereafter when she returned to work, but ended up not having to use a cane at all. Prior to April 2004, Plaintiff was having "real good pain management with medication and stretching and exercising" and was thrilled because she did not have to use a cane.

3. On April 7, 2004, Plaintiff slipped in water in a single-use bathroom. As she was getting up from the toilet, her right foot slipped and she fell straight down on her bottom jarring her whole body. The fall was so hard that it hurt her jaw and caused a tooth to chip. Plaintiff mentioned to a co-worker that she had fallen and was in a lot of pain, but she continued to work thinking that it was just muscle pain. She treated at home with hot compresses and Advil. Two days after the fall, Plaintiff reported the incident to the Assistant Coordinator, Cindy Modlin. She continued thereafter for several weeks to work her normal hours in spite of her pain due to her loyalty to Defendant-Employer, her love of working with the children, and not wanting to inconvenience other teachers.

4. On April 27, 2004, Plaintiff was walking through the classroom, pushing a trashcan when she slid on a piece of a wooden puzzle board. She was able to catch herself with the trashcan, avoiding a fall. She jarred her back, causing a further increase in her level of pain. The lead teacher, Peggy Farlow, was in the classroom and saw the incident. Plaintiff testified that Ms. Farlow said something like, "I bet that hurt", or "Oh, I could tell that hurt." Ms. Farlow urged Plaintiff to report the incident to the Director, April Glover, which she did. Ms. Glover arranged for Plaintiff to seek emergency treatment at Med Central.

5. On April 27, 2004, Plaintiff was seen at Med Central where she reported that she had fallen two weeks prior injuring her low back and that on the morning of April 27, 2004, she had tripped causing her pain to worsen. The medical provider noted that Plaintiff had chronic back pain with an acute exacerbation. Plaintiff was advised to continue taking Celebrex and to schedule physical therapy. She was seen again at Med Central on April 28, 2004, and released for light work, to include "sit down work only." Defendant-Employer did not have any "sit down work only" to offer. Plaintiff was next seen at Med Central on May 4, 2004, when she reported pain and numbness in her right hip and down her right leg, along with headaches, nausea, and depression. The medical provider ordered a CT scan of the right hip and again prescribed sit down work.

6. Plaintiff saw Dr. John Begovich, her pain management physician who is the Medical Director at The Rehab Center of High Point Regional Health Systems, on April 30, 2004. She reported a work-related accident, which led to right hip pain and a pain level elevated to 10 out of 10 in severity. Dr. Begovich noted that Plaintiff had been medically stable overall, except for her work-related accident.

7. On May 7, 2004, Plaintiff was seen by Dr. W. Can Caffrey with Sports Medicine and Orthopedics in High Point, North Carolina. Plaintiff reported that she was injured due to a fall while at work. Dr. Caffrey noted that Plaintiff had a history of fibromyalgia and known arthritis of her hips. Dr. Caffrey noted that he told Plaintiff "pure and simple that if she broke her hip, this would be considered an exacerbation of a pre-existing condition. If it is not broken, I don't think it would be indicated for any possible hip surgery . . . [or] replacement to be covered by the carrier." Plaintiff next saw Dr. Caffrey on May 28, 2004 and he recommended an open MRI of the spine and noted that Plaintiff was not able to work.

8. On May 25, 2004, Plaintiff saw her primary care physician, Dr. Rafaela Aguiar, with multiple complaints. She reported that she had fallen at work and had severe pain in her right hip and low back.

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

Related

Perkins v. U.S. Airways
628 S.E.2d 402 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 2006)
Hoyle v. Carolina Associated Mills
470 S.E.2d 357 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1996)
Russell v. Lowes Product Distribution
425 S.E.2d 454 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1993)
Smith v. Champion International
517 S.E.2d 164 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Dean v. Wesleyan Edu. Cen., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dean-v-wesleyan-edu-cen-ncworkcompcom-2007.