Goolsby v. Yadkin Valley Motor Co.

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedMay 11, 2007
DocketI.C. NO. 234416.
StatusPublished

This text of Goolsby v. Yadkin Valley Motor Co. (Goolsby v. Yadkin Valley Motor 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
Goolsby v. Yadkin Valley Motor Co., (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 receive further evidence or to rehear the parties or their representatives, the Full Commission upon reconsideration of the evidence, modifies 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. It is stipulated that all parties are properly before the Commission and that the Commission has jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject matter pursuant to the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

2. It is stipulated that all parties have been correctly designated and that there is no question as to misjoinder or nonjoinder of parties.

3. The date of the injury by accident is April 9, 2002.

*Page 2

4. At the time of the injury by accident, the parties were subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act, and there was an employer-employee relationship between the parties.

5. Defendants admit that on April 9, 2002, Plaintiff sustained an injury by accident to the hand arising out of and in the course of his employment.

6. Stipulated Exhibits 1 — 3, Defendants' Exhibit 1, and Plaintiff's Exhibit 1, are hereby entered into evidence.

7. The issues to be heard are the following:

a. Whether the blows and trauma Plaintiff sustained in the April 9, 2002 accident on the job brought about and/or caused the condition of "syncope" and thereafter, on or about August 28, 2002, caused Plaintiff's cardiac difficulties and/or heart attack?

b. Whether or not Plaintiff has been totally and permanently disabled pursuant to the North Carolina General Statutes since April 9, 2002?

c. Whether Plaintiff's current complaints of cardiac issues are causally related to the compensable accident to the hand and whether he is currently disabled as a result of the compensable accident to the hand?

d. Whether all medical and disability benefits due to Plaintiff have already been paid?

* * * * * * * * * * *
Based on the foregoing Stipulations and the evidence presented, the Full Commission makes the following: *Page 3

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Plaintiff was born on December 18, 1940 and was 64 years old as of the date of the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner. He had worked as an auto body mechanic for Defendant-Employer since 1991.

2. Since 1999, Plaintiff has suffered from many serious medical conditions, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, peripheral vascular disease, high blood pressure, bradycardia (low heart rate) and several episodes of dizziness.

3. On April 9, 2002, Plaintiff arrived at work at approximately 7:45 a.m., talked to his supervisor and was instructed to begin work on a Nissan vehicle that had rear end damage. The vehicle was equipped with a heavy spoiler across the trunk. While Plaintiff was working on the rear end of the vehicle, the trunk lid fell, striking him on the left side of his head. Plaintiff pushed the lid up and continued working. The trunk lid later fell again on Plaintiff's hand with such force that it latched shut on Plaintiff's right hand, cutting it in five places due to "jagged metal" from the work plaintiff had already begun on the body of the car. After Plaintiff was able to get the lid released and free his hand, he wrapped his hand in a towel due to significant bleeding and walked a short distance to sit down because he felt nauseated. Robert Price, Plaintiff's stepson and co-worker, initially assisted Plaintiff. Mr. Price then returned to his work duties while Plaintiff was sitting. When he returned to check on Plaintiff about 10 minutes later he found Plaintiff lying on the floor unconscious and he summoned for help. Plaintiff testified that when he regained consciousness, Mr. Roark was present saying, "Don't leave me now." Co-worker, Craig Hollar, made and applied a splint to Plaintiff's right hand before he was transported to the emergency room at Wilkes Regional Medical Center. *Page 4

4. Because he was the primary care physician for Plaintiff, Dr. Zbigniew Cichon was called to the emergency room to evaluate Plaintiff after it was established that he needed to be admitted to the hospital. Dr. Cichon testified that Plaintiff had very extensive damage to the right hand and forearm area and his skin was so lacerated it could not be sutured. Plaintiff's hand was treated with a topical cream, antibiotics and other medications for inflammation and to prevent infection and narcotics for pain. X-rays taken of the right hand that day were negative for fractures.

5. Due to Plaintiff's low heart rate and fainting episode, Plaintiff was admitted to the hospital and was evaluated by Dr. Cichon, Dr. David M. Seales, a neurologist, and Dr. Francesca Spencer, a cardiologist. While hospitalized, Plaintiff was diagnosed with chronic bradycardia (low heart rate) as his heart rate was in the low forties. Plaintiff had previously been diagnosed with a low heart rate, but not in the low forties. Dr. Cichon was concerned enough to consult with Dr. David Kim, a vascular surgeon, about Plaintiff's low heart rate. Dr. Kim and Dr. Cichon both felt a pacemaker would be beneficial. Plaintiff testified that prior to April 9, 2002, he had experienced dizziness while at work, but had not fainted.

6. With respect to his injury of April 9, 2002, Dr. Cichon testified that Plaintiff had a period where he lost consciousness (syncope) and that Plaintiff was treated with medications and monitored continuously while in the hospital due to the potential damage to organs from the loss of circulation.

7. On April 26, 2002, Dr. David Kim performed the insertion of the pacemaker and Plaintiff's heart rate became normal. About one week later, Plaintiff returned to work for twenty hours per week. Plaintiff continued to receive treatment for his right hand. *Page 5

8. On August 28, 2002, Plaintiff suffered a myocardial infraction (heart attack) for which Dr. Gretchen Wells, a board-certified cardiologist and internist, treated him at Baptist Hospital Coronary Care Unit. Dr. Wells found a nearly occluded right coronary artery, which her associate opened up and repaired using a stint. Dr. Wells testified that cardiologists use the word heart attack, or myocardial infarction to mean a plaque rupture in one of the blood vessels supplying the heart. Plaintiff testified that his chest pain started either the day before or the day of his heart attack.

9. Plaintiff testified that Defendant-Employer terminated his employment in December 2002. Plaintiff used his health insurance to pay doctor and hospital bills until his insurance was cancelled. Plaintiff testified that he then received Medicaid, but it was stopped when he began receiving disability benefits.

10. Dr. Wells testified that there was no relationship between Plaintiff's accident at work on April 9, 2002, and Plaintiff's heart attack. She testified that the catheterization and stint insertion procedure revealed a build-up of arterial plaque, which was the cause of the heart attack. Dr.

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)
Click v. Pilot Freight Carriers, Inc.
265 S.E.2d 389 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1980)
Russell v. Lowes Product Distribution
425 S.E.2d 454 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1993)
Holley v. Acts, Inc.
581 S.E.2d 750 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Goolsby v. Yadkin Valley Motor Co., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goolsby-v-yadkin-valley-motor-co-ncworkcompcom-2007.