Jackson v. Vance County Board of Education

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedJanuary 29, 2002
DocketI.C. NO. 747415
StatusPublished

This text of Jackson v. Vance County Board of Education (Jackson v. Vance County Board of Education) 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. Vance County Board of Education, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2002).

Opinion

***********
Upon review of the competent evidence of record with reference to the errors assigned, and finding no good grounds to reconsider the evidence, receive further evidence, rehear the parties or their representatives, or amend the award, except for minor modifications, the Full Commission MODIFIES and AFFIRMS 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 before the Deputy Commissioner as:

STIPULATIONS
1. At the time of the incident on May 7, 1997 plaintiff was an employee of the Vance County Board of Education and worked as a school counselor at Dabney Elementary School.

2. Plaintiff was injured on the premises of Dabney Elementary School on May 7, 1997.

3. Plaintiff's yearly salary as of May 7, 1997 was $37,279.20.

The issues before the Commission are:

Does the Commission have jurisdiction over this claim pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 115C-338;

Did plaintiff file a claim for benefits under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 115C-338;

If the Vance County Board of Education's alleged failure to decide whether and to what extent plaintiff is entitled to benefits under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 115C-338 was, in fact, a denial of her claim;

Whether plaintiff suffered any injury or disability resulting from or arising out of any episode of violence.

5. An additional issue presented to the Full Commission by plaintiff's motion to dismiss is whether defendant's appeal to the Full Commission was timely filed pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. §§ 97-85, 115C-338(c).

6. The Commission takes judicial notice of the Forms 18 and 33 contained in the Commission file in this case, as well as the letter to the Commission from defense counsel dated May 29, 2001 appealing the Opinion and Award of Deputy Commissioner Stanback.

***********
The Full Commission adopts the findings of fact found by the Deputy Commissioner with modifications and finds as follows:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Plaintiff was employed as a special education teacher at Dabney Elementary School in Vance County. On May 7, 1997 plaintiff experienced an episode of violence as she was escorting to the school office a student who had injured his ear. This student usually attended a self-contained Learning Disabilities classroom. As plaintiff walked down the hallway, the student pulled away from plaintiff, pulled plaintiff down against the wall and the floor, and dragged plaintiff approximately fifteen feet down the hallway. Criminal charges were brought against the student and the matter was heard in Vance County juvenile court.

2. At the time of the incident plaintiff was unaware that she had sustained any injury. However, after plaintiff returned home and ate dinner, she was unable to get up from the table. Plaintiff was taken to the emergency room at Maria Parham Hospital where she told the emergency room physician about the incident at school. Plaintiff was experiencing pain in her right leg and thigh.

3. Plaintiff returned to work the next day, but was having a great deal of difficulty moving around, so she again sought medical attention. Plaintiff was given muscle relaxers and pain medication which she continued to take until the last day of school on May 22, 1997. During this period of time, plaintiff experienced sharp pains in her muscles and an inability to walk at times.

4. Dr. Atul Kumar began treating plaintiff on June 3, 1997. Previous to this time, plaintiff had been treated by Drs. Charlton and Watson for diabetes, cold symptoms, tingling and numbness in her arm and some neck and back pain. Dr. Kumar's initial treatment of plaintiff was ongoing care for her diabetes. However, by the August 12, 1997 visit, plaintiff had written a letter to Dr. Kumar detailing her injury at school on May 7, 1997 and explaining that she thought some of her current medical conditions might be related to that injury.

5. Prior to her injury of May 7, 1997 plaintiff had been diagnosed with major depression, diabetes, and back pain. Dr. Kumar completed disability forms for plaintiff, indicating that she was permanently and totally disabled as a result of her depression. Plaintiff continued to treat with Dr. Kumar, indicating that she felt achy all over, was unable to work or to sleep and was having headaches.

6. Dr. Kumar referred plaintiff to Dr. Kaplowitz and Dr. Krishnareddy, orthopedic surgeons, who treated plaintiff from April 1998 through October 1998. During that period of time, plaintiff complained of back pain and left leg pain. Plaintiff described the May 7, 1997 incident to Dr. Kaplowitz.

7. In May 1998, Dr. Kumar referred plaintiff to Dr. Eaton, a psychiatrist, as plaintiff continued to show symptoms of major depression, including crying inconsolably.

8. In January 1999, Dr. Kumar also referred plaintiff to Dr. Tabet, a neurologist. Plaintiff complained of right arm pain, pain in the left hip and left leg. She experienced tremors, blurriness and an inability to walk. Dr. Tabet ordered an MRI, which showed evidence of chronic ischemic periventricular white matter changes in the brain. Dr. Tabet ruled out multiple sclerosis as a diagnosis but continued to keep plaintiff under observation.

9. By May 1999 plaintiff had been hospitalized as an inpatient secondary to her homicidal ideations towards her husband. Plaintiff continued to suffer from major depression, and she had multiple somatic complaints of aches and pains all over. Dr. Kumar continued to follow plaintiff's diabetic condition as well.

10. By June of 2000, Dr. Kumar transferred plaintiff's care back to Dr. Charlton. Plaintiff never reached maximum medical improvement of her symptoms while under Dr. Kumar's care. The injuries plaintiff sustained as a result of her May 7, 1997 incident at school were a contributing factor in causing and/or aggravating the symptoms for which she was treated. Plaintiff's inability to work after May 22, 1997 was causally related to the May 7, 1997 incident at school.

11. Beginning June 2, 1997 plaintiff applied for and began receiving short-term and then long-term disability benefits, pursuant to an employer-funded plan, mainly for diabetes and depression. On December 12, 1997 plaintiff sent a letter to Wayne Adcock, then Superintendent of Vance County Schools, and Robert Fleming, Chairman of the Board of Education, requesting that her benefits be changed to those available under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 115C-338 because of the May 7, 1997 episode of violence. Plaintiff followed with a letter on December 29, 1997 to William McLean, Executive Director of Human Resources for Vance County, making the same request. Plaintiff also had periodic conversations with Mr. McLean concerning her claim. Mr. McLean never made a formal request to the Board of Education for a hearing on plaintiff's claim.

12. N.C. Gen. Stat. § 115C-338 provides that any full-time employee in any educational institution supported by and under the control of the State is eligible to make a claim for benefits for injuries arising out of an episode of violence.

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

Related

Moore v. City of Raleigh
520 S.E.2d 133 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Jackson v. Vance County Board of Education, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-vance-county-board-of-education-ncworkcompcom-2002.