Gentry v. Reaves Construction Co.

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedJuly 3, 2008
DocketI.C. NO. 495399.
StatusPublished

This text of Gentry v. Reaves Construction Co. (Gentry v. Reaves Construction Co.) 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
Gentry v. Reaves Construction Co., (N.C. Super. Ct. 2008).

Opinion

* * * * * * * * * * *
The Full Commission reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Houser and the briefs and oral 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; or amend the *Page 2 Opinion and Award, except for minor modifications. Accordingly, the Full Commission affirms the Opinion and Award of Deputy Commissioner Houser with minor modifications.

* * * * * * * * * * *
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 Deputy Commissioner as:

STIPULATIONS
1. An employee-employer relationship existed between William Rick Smith, hereinafter referred to as the decedent, and defendant-employer at the time of the accident in question.

2. On all relevant dates, Key Risk Insurance Company was the carrier on the risk.

3. The date of the accident in question was January 17, 2005.

4. The decedent sustained an injury on January 17, 2005 which resulted in his death on that date.

5. On all relevant dates, all parties hereto were subject to the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act at the time of the accident, the employer employing the requisite number of employees to be bound under the provisions of the Act.

6. The decedent sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment with defendant-employer on January 17, 2005. Defendants admitted the compensability of said injury under the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

7. Tyler Jordan Gentry and Brandon Carroll Smith were wholly dependent for support upon the earnings of the decedent at the time of the accident and his death, and that they are entitled to receive a share of the death benefits under the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act. *Page 3

8. It is stipulated that defendants are entitled to receive a credit for payments they have made to Tyler Jordan Gentry as against the final award of benefits due him under the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

9. At the hearing, the parties submitted the following:

a. A Packet of various stipulated documents which included a birth certificate of Tyler Gentry, a Voluntary Support Agreement and Order, a Custody Agreement, an Order from District Court dated December 12, 1998, Developmental Evaluation Findings and Industrial Commission Filings and Orders, and which was admitted into the record and marked as Stipulated Exhibit (2), and;

b. An Investigation DVD, which was admitted into the record and marked as Stipulated Exhibit (3) to the extent it corroborates witnesses' testimony.

10. Copies of checks (back and front) submitted by Mr. Reaves pursuant to the Order of March 25, 2008 are allowed into evidence.

* * * * * * * * * * *
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 decedent was born on June 12, 1957 and was married on January 17, 2005, the date of the accident causing his death.

2. The parties have stipulated that Tyler Jordan Gentry, born October 15, 1995 and Brandon Carroll Smith, born July 1, 1989 were the decedent's acknowledged illegitimate children and were wholly dependent upon him for support on January 17, 2005. As whole *Page 4 dependents, both are entitled to share the death benefits pursuant to the Act. Mr. Harry W. Gentry has been duly appointed as the guardian adlitem for Tyler Jordan Gentry. Mr. Jonathan Winstead has been duly appointed as the guardian ad litem for Brandon Carroll Smith.

3. The decedent was employed by defendant-employer as a general laborer. Defendant-employer is a builder/contractor. At the time of the accident in question, decedent was a member of a crew building a home. Decedent's tasks primarily involved general labor and cleaning the construction site.

4. On January 17, 2005, the decedent was cleaning in a house when he fell more than ten feet off a second floor balcony. He sustained a broken neck and was killed instantly upon impact with the concrete floor.

5. Heather Pierce was an adult child of the decedent on January 17, 2005. On that date, Ms. Pierce was twenty-five years of age. She earned $320.00 per week at her job in the daycare industry until December 7, 2004. Ms. Pierce had held that job for approximately four years prior to December 7, 2004.

6. In November 2004, the decedent sent $500.00 to Ms. Pierce, who was living in Kentucky, so that she would have the financial means to move back to North Carolina. The move was completed on or about December 17, 2004. Ms. Pierce had four children who moved with her. The children who came to live with the decedent were Kaitlyn Pierce, age seven, twins Kayla Pierce and Kayleigh Pierce, and an infant Gavin Crom, who was less than one year old at the time.

7. At the time of the move, Ms. Pierce was receiving $249.82 in child support from the father of Gavin Crom and Medicaid benefits. Ms. Pierce testified that after the move, she had only $5.00 in cash. After settling in North Carolina, Ms. Pierce began searching for work *Page 5 and secured a job at Burger King, but had not begun working at the time of decedent's death. While in North Carolina, Ms. Pierce resided with the decedent and his roommate, Tim Blanton. The decedent and Mr. Blanton split the cost of rent and utilities for the residence. Also, while in North Carolina, the decedent provided some support to Ms. Pierce in the form of purchasing food and purchasing Christmas items for her children in December 2004.

8. Aside from the information noted in the above paragraphs, Ms. Pierce provided no other documentation or evidence concerning her monthly expenses, her monthly income or proof of support from the decedent.

9. The Full Commission finds that on January 17, 2005 Heather Pierce was over eighteen years of age and therefore is not entitled to the conclusive presumption of whole dependency.

10. Based upon the totality of the credible evidence of record, the Full Commission finds that on January 17, 2005 Heather Pierce was partially dependent upon the earnings of the decedent for support. Additionally, the undersigned find Ms. Pierce's contention that time prior to her eighteenth birthday be considered to qualify her as a whole dependent does not correspond with the meaning and intent of the sections of the Act in question.

11. Jimmy Reaves, defendant-employer's owner, had been in the construction business for approximately thirty years prior to the date of the accident. Mr. Reaves had used harness restraint systems in the past when employees worked at heights. However, defendant-employer only required employees to use harness restraint systems when working on roofs and did not use them at any other time prior to the date of the accident.

12. Craig Sembly, an OSHA investigator, investigated the accident and inspected the accident site on January 25, 2005. Mr. Sembly met with Mr. Reaves, took photographs of the *Page 6 site, talked with witnesses, and took measurements. As a result of his investigation, Mr.

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

Related

Shealy v. Associated Transport, Inc.
114 S.E.2d 702 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1960)
State Ex Rel. Andrews v. Chateau X, Inc.
250 S.E.2d 603 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1979)
Thomas v. Raleigh Gas Co.
11 S.E.2d 297 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Gentry v. Reaves Construction Co., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gentry-v-reaves-construction-co-ncworkcompcom-2008.