Grimes v. Flowers Company

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedMarch 4, 2002
DocketI.C. NO. 565151
StatusPublished

This text of Grimes v. Flowers Company (Grimes v. Flowers Company) 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
Grimes v. Flowers Company, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2002).

Opinion

***********
The Full Commission has reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Stephenson, including the deposition testimony of Dr. Steven A. Siciliano, Dr. Kern Carlton and Dr. Jeffrey Ewert, and the briefs and oral arguments before the Full Commission. The appealing parties have not shown good ground to reconsider the evidence; receive further evidence; rehear the parties or their representatives; or amend the Opinion and Award except for modifications set forth herein. Accordingly, the Full Commission modifies and affirms the Opinion and Award of Deputy Commissioner Theresa B. Stephenson.

***********
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 and following in a Pre-Trial Agreement admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #1 as:

STIPULATIONS
1. All parties are properly before the North Carolina Industrial Commission and are subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

2. On August 14, 1995, an employment relationship existed between the employee and defendant-employer.

3. On August 14, 1995, Zenith Insurance Company was the carrier at risk.

4. The parties stipulated plaintiff's average weekly wage on August 14, 1995 was $360.00, yielding a compensation rate of $240.01 per week.

5. The following Industrial Commission Forms are admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #2: Forms 28U, 33 dated 20 March 2000, 33R dated 15 June 2000, and 44.

6. Stipulated Exhibit #3 includes the Opinion and Award by Commissioner Thomas J. Bolch, filed January 14, 1999, transcript of the March 19, 1997 hearing before the Deputy Commissioner and medical depositions taken with respect to that hearing before the Deputy Commissioner.

7. The July 11, 2000 Industrial Commission Order filed by special Deputy Commissioner Gina Cammarano is admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #4.

8. Plaintiff's medicals regarding this claim are admitted into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit #5.

9. The issues to be determined by the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner are whether plaintiff is entitled to further benefits as a result of his compensable injury; and, if so, in what amount.

***********
RULINGS ON EVIDENTIARY MATTERS
The objections contained within the depositions of Dr. Jeffrey Ewert and Dr. T. Kern Carlton, III, are ruled upon in accordance with the applicable provision of the law and the Opinion and Award in this case.

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

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On August 14, 1999, plaintiff, then 47 years old, was employed by defendant-employer as a crankshaft grinder. On that date, plaintiff sustained an injury by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment with defendant-employer when a piece of metal weighing ten to eighteen pounds flew out of the machine and struck plaintiff in the face.

2. Defendants accepted compensability for this injury by accident, and plaintiff received temporary total disability from August 22, 1995 through September 11, 1995. Plaintiff did not miss more than twenty-one (21) days of work as a result of the injury.

3. As a result of plaintiff's August 14, 1995 compensable injury, he sustained an orbital rim fracture and a laceration to the left side of his cheek. This laceration resulted in a scar for which plaintiff received $1,500.00 for disfigurement compensation pursuant to the Full Commission Opinion and Award by Commissioner Thomas J. Bolch, filed January 14, 1999.

4. Following plaintiff's compensable injury, he received treatment for an orbital nerve injury from Dr. Larry Boyles, a neurologist and Dr. Steven Siciliano, a plastic surgeon. The physicians also treated plaintiff for headaches. This particular treatment occurred prior to the previous hearing before Deputy Commissioner William Bost on March 19, 1997, and the Opinion filed by former Deputy Commissioner Bost on May 29, 1998.

5. The issues involved in the hearing before former Deputy Commissioner Bost were average weekly wage, permanent partial disability and safety penalty. The two parties submitted different but similar Pre-Trial Agreements.

6. Plaintiff appealed former Deputy Commissioner Bost's Opinion and Award. The basis of the appeal per the I.C. Form 44 was as follows:

"1. The Deputy Commissioner awarded inadequate compensation ($1,500.00) for the employee's facial disfigurement (Award No. 1).

2. The Deputy Commissioner erred in failing to award compensation for facial numbness and nerve damage (Findings 9 and10).

3. The Deputy Commissioner erred in failing to order evaluation by a head injury specialist as requested by the employee (in addition to Baptist Hospital Pain Control which was ordered).

4. The Deputy Commissioner erred in failing to award a ten percent (10%) safety penalty under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 97-12 (Finding No. 16).

5. The Deputy Commissioner erred in failing to order temporary total compensation pursuant to June 27, 1997 Form28U signed by Dr. Boyles, the treating physician.

6. The Deputy Commissioner erred in failing to sanction defendants for not providing a wage chart."

7. By Opinion and Award filed in January 14, 1999, the Full Commission determined plaintiff was not at maximum medical improvement and was in need of further treatment, specifically by N.C. Baptist Hospital. The Full Commission further affirmed the $1,500.00 award for facial disfigurement and awarded "plaintiff a ten percent (10%) safety penalty on all compensation heretofore or hereafter paid to plaintiff by reason of this compensable injury." The Full Commission did not award any amount for nerve damage or facial numbness inasmuch as plaintiff was not at maximum medical improvement at that time and inasmuch as his physician had testified at that time that the nerve was likely to regenerate.

8. Plaintiff has received follow-up treatment and evaluation for facial numbness and headaches. Among other things, plaintiff had tried anti-convulsants and a series of sympathetic ganglion blocks. The blocks provided some temporary pain relief, and plaintiff controls some pain and depression with regular doses of oxycontin. Although the physician had testified prior to the first Full Commission Opinion and Award in this case that he believed the inferior orbital nerve would regenerate, Dr. Steven Siciliano, the employee's plastic surgeon, testified on deposition after the hearing by Deputy Commissioner Stephenson, and the Full Commission finds as fact, that such regeneration did not occur and that plaintiff had 100% loss of the inferior orbital nerve which was crushed by the block of steel. This nerve damage has resulted in permanent numbness left of the employee's nose all around his eye including part of forehead, plus numbness in his gums and roof of his mouth. The reasonable compensation for this severed nerve is $5,000.00.

9. Plaintiff has also experienced cognitive difficulties following the compensable injury. Although back at work, plaintiff continues to exhibit memory problems and difficulties concentrating. Plaintiff has regular nightmares of being hit in the face.

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)
§ 97-25
North Carolina § 97-25
§ 97-25.1
North Carolina § 97-25.1
§ 97-31
North Carolina § 97-31

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Grimes v. Flowers Company, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grimes-v-flowers-company-ncworkcompcom-2002.