Garcia v. Southern Products

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedJanuary 20, 2011
DocketI.C. NO. 464701.
StatusPublished

This text of Garcia v. Southern Products (Garcia v. Southern Products) 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
Garcia v. Southern Products, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2011).

Opinion

***********
The Full Commission has reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Chief Deputy Commissioner Taylor and the briefs and arguments before the Full Commission. The appealing party has not shown good grounds to reconsider the evidence, receive further evidence, rehear the parties or their representatives. The Full *Page 2 Commission AFFIRMS with some modifications the Opinion and Award of the Chief 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 before the Chief Deputy Commissioner as:

STIPULATIONS
1. All parties were properly before the Commission, the Commission had jurisdiction at the time the contested Opinion and Awards were entered, and the Commission retained jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject matter.

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

3. All parties are subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

4. The employer-employee relationship existed between [decedent Jose Garcia] and defendant-employer Southern Products Silica Company, Inc., prior to and on September 16, 2004.

5. The Montgomery Insurance Company is the carrier on the risk for defendant-employer.

6. The parties stipulated into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit 1 the following:

• Plaintiff's Motion to Set Aside Order and Award, dated and served April 11, 2008, with exhibits.

***********
EXHIBITS *Page 3
The following exhibits were admitted at the hearing:

• Plaintiff's Exhibit 1: December 10, 2004 letter to Deputy Commissioner Stephen Gheen from defense counsel Heidi Maske;

• Plaintiff's Exhibit 2: October 5, 2004 letter to Tamatha Giddens Garcia from Ms. Maske;

• Plaintiff's Exhibit 3: September 24, 2004 letter to Tammy Garcia from Montgomery Insurance;

• Plaintiff's Exhibit 4: Richmond County Schools Referral for Alternative Education;

• Plaintiff's Exhibit 5: Social Security Printout;

• Defendants' Exhibit 1: Defendants' Request to Industrial Commission signed by Tamatha Giddens Garcia that she be recognized as the custodial parent and natural guardian of Chad Dwayne Giddens, Miranda Shay Spaulding and Joseph Armando Garcia.

In addition, the following prior Opinion and Awards are part of the evidence of record:

• March 22, 2005 Opinion and Award by Deputy Commissioner Stephen T. Gheen;

• December 7, 2006 Supplemental Opinion and Award by Deputy Commissioner Stephen T. Gheen;

• May 24, 2007 Opinion and Award by Deputy Commissioner Chrystal Redding Stanback.

***********
ISSUES *Page 4
1. Whether the March 22, 2005, December 7, 2006 and May 24, 2007 Opinion and Awards previously entered in this matter should be set aside;

2. Should a separate guardian ad litem be appointed to protect the interests of the minor child; and

3. Is defendant-carrier estopped from recovery of any payments that should not have been paid to persons that were not dependents.

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

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On September 16, 2004, Jose Palomino Garcia (hereafter "decedent") was employed by defendant-employer and earned an average weekly wage of $504.12, yielding a compensation rate of $336.10. Decedent sustained a compensable injury by accident resulting in his death on September 16, 2004.

2. Tamatha Giddens Garcia was married to decedent on September 4, 1991 and remained married to him at the time of his death on September 16, 2004.

3. Tamatha Garcia and decedent had one child born to the marriage, Joseph Armando Garcia, born December 23, 2003.

4. At the time of the death of decedent on September 16, 2004, Joseph Armando Garcia was a minor and resided in the home with decedent and Tamatha Giddens Garcia.

5. Ms. Garcia was informed of the death of decedent by a representative from defendant-carrier. *Page 5

6. Ms. Garcia had two other children, Miranda Shay Spaulding, born November 28, 1988, and Chad Dwayne Giddens, born April 8, 1987. Neither Miranda Shay Spaulding nor Chad Dwayne Giddens were born to the marriage of decedent and Tamatha Garcia, and decedent was not the natural father of either Miranda Shay Spaulding or Chad Dwayne Giddens.

7. On September 16, 2004, Chad Dwayne Giddens was not residing in the home with decedent and Tamatha Garcia. Chad Dwayne Giddens resided at 506 Wagram Street, Laurinburg, North Carolina with his uncle and had been residing there approximately four months prior to the death of decedent.

8. On September 16, 2004 and for more than four months prior, decedent did not provide any financial support for Chad Dwayne Giddens. Chad Dwayne Giddens was not enrolled in school. He had quit school and was employed by Larry Locklear making cabinets. On September 16, 2004, Chad Dwayne Giddens was supporting himself. He dropped out of school in March 2004 to go to Richmond County Community College to obtain his GED. Thereafter, Chad Dwayne Giddens quit school and went to work for Mr. Locklear. From March 2004 through the time of his death on September 16, 2004, decedent was not providing any income or benefits to Chad Dwayne Giddens

9. Chad Dwayne Giddens was not substantially dependent upon decedent at the time of his death.

10. Miranda Shay Spaulding was born November 28, 1988 and lived in the home with decedent and Tamatha Garcia on September 16, 2004.

11. Miranda Shay Spaulding received Social Security disability benefits due to the disability of her biological father, Marshall Anthony Spaulding. Miranda Shay Spaulding began to receive those benefits in December 1988 shortly after she was born and those benefits terminated *Page 6 in November 2006. During the time she received benefits, Miranda Shay Spaulding received approximately $485.00 per month. On September 16, 2004, Miranda Shay Spaulding was receiving $485.00 per month from Social Security and was not being supported by decedent.

12. Miranda Shay Spaulding was not substantially dependent upon decedent at the time of his death.

13. For the tax year of 2003, the three children of Tamatha Giddens Garcia were claimed as dependents on the tax returns for Tamatha Giddens Garcia and decedent. No 2004 tax return was submitted in this action, and there was no further evidence produced that indicated that decedent financially supported his stepchildren at the time of his death on September 16, 2004.

14. At the time of the death of decedent, Joseph Armando Garcia was approximately eight months old. As a matter of law, Joseph Armando Garcia could not have participated in the decision to settle his claim or whether or not to consent to the dependency of the minor step-children.

15.

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

Related

§ 97-12
North Carolina § 97-12
§ 97-2
North Carolina § 97-2(6)
§ 97-38
North Carolina § 97-38
§ 97-42
North Carolina § 97-42
§ 97-50
North Carolina § 97-50
§ 97-85
North Carolina § 97-85

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Garcia v. Southern Products, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garcia-v-southern-products-ncworkcompcom-2011.