Jackson v. Pickett House Family Care Home

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedAugust 8, 2006
DocketI.C. NO. 211298
StatusPublished

This text of Jackson v. Pickett House Family Care Home (Jackson v. Pickett House Family Care Home) 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
Jackson v. Pickett House Family Care Home, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2006).

Opinion

* * * * * * * * * * *
The Full Commission reviewed this matter based upon the record of the proceedings before the Deputy Commissioners and the briefs and oral arguments before the Full Commission. The appealing parties have not shown good grounds to receive further evidence, rehear the parties, or amend the Opinion and Award of Deputy Commissioner Rowell, except for modifications concerning the award of attorneys' fees pursuant to N.C. Gen Stat. § 97-88.1. Accordingly, the Full Commission affirms the Opinion and Award of Deputy Commissioner Rowell, with 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 and after the hearing as:

STIPULATIONS
1. All parties are properly before the Commission, and this is the Court of proper jurisdiction for this action.

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

3. On the date at issue, the parties were subject to, and bound by, the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

4. At all relevant times, an employment relationship existed between plaintiff and Pickett House.

5. Liberty Mutual Group was the compensation carrier on the risk.

6. All of plaintiff's medical records are submitted as a Stipulated Exhibit.

7. All Industrial Commission forms and filings are submitted as a Stipulated Exhibit.

8. Plaintiff's alleged date of injury is November 22, 2002.

9. Subsequent to the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner, the parties Stipulated to plaintiff's average weekly wage as $340.83, yielding a compensation rate of $227.23.

10. The parties stipulated into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit # 1, Pre-Trial Agreement.

11. The parties stipulated into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit # 2, Medical Records.

12. The parties stipulated into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit # 3, Industrial Commission forms.

13. The parties stipulated into evidence as Stipulated Exhibit # 4, Industrial Commission Rehab Nurse records (as supplemented by letter dated March 30, 2005.)

* * * * * * * * * * *
RULING ON EVIDENTIARY MATTERS
The objections contained in the Deposition of Dr. Robert J. Wilson, M.D., and Dr. Leslie R. Phillips, Ph.D., are ruled upon in accordance with the applicable rule of 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:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Plaintiff, Jacqueline C. Jackson, was 51 years of age as of the date of hearing before the Deputy Commissioner, having a date of birth of March 29, 1953.

2. Plaintiff has a high school diploma and has qualification as a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). Prior to the admittedly compensable injury in this case, plaintiff had worked as an LPN for 26 years.

3. Plaintiff was performing LPN job duties at Pickett House Family Care Home on November 22, 2002. This facility is a group home. On that date, a heavy fire extinguisher fell on her right foot, fracturing a toe and resulting in other injuries.

4. Defendants admitted the compensability of and their liability for the injury by accident pursuant to a Form 60 dated December 19, 2002. According to this Form 60, plaintiff's average weekly wage was $380.01, and she was paid weekly benefits at the compensation rate of $253.35; these amounts were later changed to an average weekly wage of $340.83 and a compensation rate of $227.23, pursuant to stipulation of the parties.

5. Following the injury, plaintiff was first seen at Durham Regional Hospital, and was provided crutches and a hard-soled shoe. Plaintiff then came under the care of physicians at Triangle Orthopaedic Associates. Plaintiff was first treated by Dr. Michele Pescasio, an orthopedic specialist. Dr. Pescasio treated plaintiff from December 2002 through approximately March 2003. Dr. Pescasio treated plaintiff for symptoms of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS), also known as Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy (RSD), although a bone scan done on January 13, 2003, did not show findings consistent with RSD/CRPS.

6. Plaintiff underwent a course of physical therapy and also used a TENS unit, but she continued to have problems. Plaintiff was seen on February 20, 2003, for a second opinion by Dr. Paul Wright at Durham Orthopedic Clinic. Dr. Wright felt that it was conceivable that plaintiff had a central nervous system lesion in the thoracolumbar spine because it was unusual for RSD/CRPS to show no improvement after three months of treatment. Dr. Wright recommended pain management.

7. Dr. Pescasio referred plaintiff to rehabilitation medicine and the pain clinic. Plaintiff then came under the care and treatment of Dr. John Guisto, a physiatrist at Triangle Orthopaedic. Plaintiff treated with Dr. Guisto from approximately April 2003 through August 2003. Dr. Guisto ordered lumbar sympathetic nerve blocks, which Dr. Robert Wilson performed on April 14, 2003. Dr. Guisto also prescribed an RS-4i sequential stimulator, as well as treatment with Dr. Leslie Phillips, a pain psychologist, for pain management.

8. Plaintiff filed a medical motion with the North Carolina Industrial Commission, which resulted in an order filed by Special Deputy Commissioner Lacy Maddox on August 24, 2003. In this order, psychologist Leslie Phillips, Ph.D., was named an authorized treating physician. In addition, defendant-carrier was ordered to provide all necessary diagnostic testing, muscle stimulator, or other rehabilitative devices as recommended by a treating physician. Pursuant to this order, plaintiff came under the care of Dr. Phillips. No attorneys' fees, sanctions, or costs were assessed by the Special Deputy Commissioner in this order.

9. After Dr. Guisto left the practice of Triangle Orthopaedics, plaintiff's care was transferred to Dr. Hong Kai K. Du. Another series of sympathetic blocks was ordered; some blocks were of benefit, while plaintiff did not report benefit from some of the blocks. Dr. Du recommended a spinal cord stimulator and noted that plaintiff was highly motivated to return to work if her pain could be controlled. When Dr. Du left the practice, plaintiff's care was transferred to Dr. Wilson. Plaintiff remains under the care of Dr. Phillips and Dr. Wilson.

10. Plaintiff, through counsel, filed a second motion to compel medical treatment with the Industrial Commission on or about March 15, 2004. This motion was to compel defendant-carrier to provide the spinal cord stimulator. However, this very treatment had been authorized by defendants on March 10, 2004, five days prior to the filing of plaintiff's motion. By order filed by Special Deputy Commissioner Robert Harris on April 12, 2004, plaintiff's motion to compel medical treatment was determined to be moot, due to the authorization that had occurred prior to the filing of the motion. Plaintiff's motion for sanctions and/or attorneys' fees was denied by the Special Deputy Commissioner.

11. On May 18, 2004, plaintiff underwent a trial of the spinal cord stimulator. Plaintiff had excellent results with the trial of the spinal cord stimulator. Accordingly, the spinal cord stimulator was permanently implanted on August 13, 2004. By the date of her appointment with Dr.

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

Related

§ 97-2
North Carolina § 97-2(6)
§ 97-25
North Carolina § 97-25
§ 97-29
North Carolina § 97-29
§ 97-88.1
North Carolina § 97-88.1
§ 97-90
North Carolina § 97-90

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Jackson v. Pickett House Family Care Home, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-pickett-house-family-care-home-ncworkcompcom-2006.