Dowd v. Dubose International

North Carolina Industrial Commission·Decided July 9, 2010·No. I.C. NOS. 780724 PH-2021.·Published

Opinion

***********
The Full Commission has reviewed Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration and Defendant's Response to Motion for Reconsideration. The Full Commission finds that Plaintiff has shown good cause to reconsider the March 29, 2010 Opinion and Award. It is herby ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration is GRANTED. Accordingly, the Full Commission's Interlocutory Opinion and Award filed on March 29, 2010, is VACATED and RESCINDED. The Full Commission enters the following Opinion and Award and thereby affirms the September 23, 2008 Opinion and Award of Deputy Commissioner Rideout. *Page 2

***********
Based upon all of the competent evidence of record and reasonable inferences flowing therefrom, the Full Commission makes the following:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The parties are subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

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

3. All parties were properly before the Deputy Commissioner and that the Industrial Commission has jurisdiction over the parties and of the subject matter.

4. The employer in this case is Dubose International.

5. Plaintiff is a 43-year-old man who has a high school diploma. Plaintiff's work history primarily consists of installing cable television.

6. At the time of Plaintiff's injury he was an employee of Dubose International in Roseboro, NC. Dubose International is owned by Charles Dubose, who owns several businesses. Mr. Dubose owns a tire shop, a junkyard, and a saw mill. Plaintiff primarily worked at the junkyard. However, Plaintiff and other employees of Dubose International worked at all three sites intermittently.

7. On May 24, 2007, Plaintiff was loading wood at the saw mill to be used later to build shelters at the junkyard. The saw mill was on a farm owned by Mr. Dubose that also contained a tree farm and a hunting club. Plaintiff was driving and using a forklift to pick up logs. The starter switch on the forklift was in disrepair and it was necessary to use a screwdriver to start the machine while standing beside it. On May 24, 2007, Plaintiff cranked the starter with *Page 3 the screwdriver when the forklift fell into gear and started moving. The forklift struck Plaintiff, knocked him down and ran over him. Plaintiff was lying in sandy dirt so that he was not completely crushed. Plaintiff suffered injuries to his bilateral shoulders, back, neck, head, and face.

8. Plaintiff was taken by ambulance to Sampson Regional Medical Center in Clinton, NC. X-rays were administered and Plaintiff was released. Defendant-Employer sent Plaintiff to treat with Dr. Agapito Fajardo, Mr. Dubose's family doctor, at Goshen Medical Center.

9. Plaintiff presented to Dr. Fajardo on May 25, 2007. The impression was abrasion of the face, neck, and right shoulder, cervical strain, and chest contusion. Plaintiff returned to Dr. Fajardo on May 30, 2007, with a swelling in his lower leg. On June 4, 2007, Dr. Fajardo released Plaintiff to return to work as of June 11, 2007.

10. Plaintiff was out of work for two-and-a-half weeks. Defendant-Employer paid him two weeks worth of wages. On approximately June 11, 2007, Plaintiff returned to work at Dubose International. Upon his return, Plaintiff was working at Defendant-Employer's junkyard. His main job duty was to separate transmissions, which are made of aluminum, from automobile engines, which are made mostly of steel. Plaintiff was experiencing pain in his back, shoulder, and neck during his return to work with Defendant-Employer.

11. Plaintiff returned to Dr. Fajardo on June 11, 2007, after having returned to work, with shoulder and neck pain, and a lump in his chest wall. Dr. Fajardo released Plaintiff to return to light duty work with no lifting more than 25 pounds for the following two weeks.

12. Upon Plaintiff's return to work at light duty, he was expected to do the same job duties that he performed before his compensable injury. Plaintiff was told that there was no light *Page 4 duty work available for him to do. Plaintiff struggled to do his job for approximately two weeks. Defendant-Employer required Plaintiff to lift heavy objects, climb up and down on the forklift, help build shelters, and climb ladders, which he could not do. In June of 2007, after approximately two weeks after his return to work, Plaintiff left his job with Defendant-Employer. Plaintiff left the job because he was being forced to do work that he could not physically do after his injury.

13. Plaintiff returned to Dr. Fajardo on July 2, 2007. Dr. Fajardo noted that Plaintiff was having paresthesia in his left arm, ulnar distribution of the neck, and paresthesia of the fourth and fifth fingers on his left hand. Dr. Fajardo also noted neck stiffness with limited range of motion and numbness under the medial aspect of the left arm. Dr. Fajardo's impression was cervical strain and lumbar strain. Dr. Fajardo subsequently referred Plaintiff to Dr. Alexander Huff at Huff Orthopaedic.

14. Plaintiff presented to Dr. Huff on July 18, 2007, with persistent pain in his neck, left shoulder, and back. Dr. Huff's impression was lower back pain status post trauma and he ordered lumbar x-rays and an MRI. Dr. Huff released Plaintiff to sedentary work.

15. Plaintiff returned to Dr. Huff on August 13, 2007, with chronic lower back pain. Dr. Huff noted that an MRI revealed multi-level bulging of the fibers in the annulus and disc protrusion at L5-S1. Dr. Huff ordered physical therapy.

16. Plaintiff returned to Dr. Huff on September 27, 2007, with back and neck pain, and numbness under his arm. Dr. Huff's impression was lumbar pain and radiculitis of the cervical spine. Dr. Huff ordered an MRI of Plaintiff's cervical spine. Plaintiff was released to light duty with a 10-pound lifting restriction. Physical therapy was continued. Plaintiff was scheduled to return three weeks later after the MRI. *Page 5

17. Defendant-Employer initially paid for Plaintiff's medical treatment and told him that they were going to provide ongoing treatment and pay for his medical bills. Plaintiff was told that his medical bills would be paid out of pocket so that the treatment would not increase Defendant-Employer's insurance rates.

18. Plaintiff's cervical MRI was never authorized by Defendant-Employer. Approximately six months after Plaintiff's injury, Plaintiff returned to Dr. Huff. He was told that he could not be seen because Defendant-Employer was no longer paying for his medical bills and had refused to authorize further medical treatment for Plaintiff.

19. Plaintiff continued to call Defendant-Employer to inquire as to why his medical bills were not being paid. Approximately six months after Plaintiff's injury, Plaintiff was told that Defendant-Employer did not have workers' compensation insurance coverage for his injury. Plaintiff was not aware that Defendant-Employer did not have workers' compensation insurance prior to that time and Defendant-Employer had not informed him of that fact.

20. Plaintiff testified that Defendant-Employer had anywhere between 10 and 15 employees at the time of his injury. This was confirmed by the Employment Security Commission records submitted into evidence. Those employees were dispersed between the saw mill, tire company, and junkyard.

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

Dowd v. Dubose International, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2010).

Dowd v. Dubose International (Dowd v. Dubose International) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

§ 97-2
North Carolina § 97-2(3)
§ 97-25
North Carolina § 97-25
§ 97-25.1
North Carolina § 97-25.1
§ 97-29
North Carolina § 97-29
§ 97-88.1
North Carolina § 97-88.1
§ 97-93
North Carolina § 97-93
§ 97-94
North Carolina § 97-94(d)