Khan v. Tyco Electronics

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedOctober 6, 2008
DocketI.C. NO. 663105.
StatusPublished

This text of Khan v. Tyco Electronics (Khan v. Tyco Electronics) 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
Khan v. Tyco Electronics, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2008).

Opinion

***********
The Full Commission has reviewed the prior Opinion and Award based upon the record of the proceedings before Deputy Commissioner Donovan 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; or rehear the parties or their representatives; or amend the Opinion and Award. The Full Commission hereby affirms the Opinion and Award of Deputy Commissioner Donovan 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. On September 13, 2006, the date of the alleged injury by accident, the parties were subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act. *Page 2

2. On the date of the alleged injury, an employment relationship existed between plaintiff and employer-defendant.

3. At all times relevant to plaintiff's alleged injury on September 13, 2006, employer-defendant Tyco Electronics was self-insured and Sedgewick CMS was its Servicing Agent.

4. The plaintiff's average weekly wage is $846.17, which yields a compensation rate of $564.14, as reflected in payroll documentation produced by defendants.

5. The issues for determination are:

a. Whether plaintiff sustained a compensable injury by accident to the right knee and/or right shoulder on or about September 13, 2006, arising out of his employment with employer-defendant?

b. Whether plaintiff's current medical condition is causally related to the alleged accident of September 13, 2006?

c. If plaintiff's injury and/or current medical condition are compensable, to what compensation and medical benefits, if any, is plaintiff entitled?

6. The parties stipulated to the following documentary evidence:

• Stipulated Exhibit 1 — Industrial Commission Forms, plaintiff's medical records by provider, plaintiff's Social Security Disability file, defendants' discovery responses and plaintiff's discovery responses.

• Stipulated Exhibit 2 — Plaintiff's complete personnel file

• Stipulated Exhibit 3 — Additional medical records

*********** *Page 3
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. At the time of the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner, plaintiff had been employed at employer from March 1995 until October 30, 2006. Plaintiff was employed as a stamping associate and his job duties included operating a stamping press.

2. On September 12, 2006, the day before plaintiff's alleged injury at work, plaintiff was unloading a heavy fence from the back of a pickup truck at his home. Plaintiff slipped and fell off the side of his truck. As a result of his fall, plaintiff went to the Emergency Room.

3. While at the Emergency Room, plaintiff's right side was x-rayed and he was given pain medication and an injection. In addition, plaintiff was provided with an out of work note that took him out of work for three days.

4. The next morning before work, plaintiff called his supervisor, Jackie Weatherman, and told him that he had sustained an accident the night before when he fell off his truck while trying to unload a fence and he had been in the hospital emergency room most of the night. Plaintiff told Mr. Weatherman that he badly bruised his hip and buttocks area and wanted to know what his options were with respect to missing work. Mr. Weatherman explained to him that if he had a doctor's note, then employer would not allow him to return to work until the doctor released him. Plaintiff did not tell Mr. Weatherman at that time that he had a doctor's note taking him out of work for three days. Mr. Weatherman also explained to plaintiff that his absence would be excused with no pay unless it went over seven full days, and on the eighth day, it would go into short term disability. Mr. Weatherman told plaintiff in essence that if you do not have a doctor's excuse, then it goes in as unexcused time. *Page 4

5. Plaintiff reported to work on September 13, 2006, and received his assignment from his group leader, Rick Wilson. Plaintiff testified that while working at the stamping press, he fell two times, and almost fell a third time, injuring his right knee and right shoulder in the falls.

6. Plaintiff admitted at hearing that his right shoulder had a small tear for "quite a while before" his alleged falls at work. Plaintiff also admitted to previously injuring his right shoulder weight lifting. Plaintiff testified that he was receiving ongoing medical treatment for his right shoulder and back prior to his alleged falls.

7. Plaintiff testified that when he returned to work the day after his fall from the pickup truck, his leg gave out and caused him to fall at work. Plaintiff further testified that the only thing he could think of that would cause his at-work fall was (1) that his knee was not able to carry the load of an injured thigh during the day, (2) that weakness in his leg from his thigh injury caused him to fall, and (3) that the medication he was on caused him to fall.

8. Lorne Green testified that he witnessed plaintiff fall against a tool box at work on September 13, 2006. Plaintiff told Mr. Green that he fell because his knee gave way. Contrary to plaintiff's discovery responses, Mr. Green did not catch plaintiff when he fell.

9. Plaintiff did not give his doctor's excuse to his supervisor, Mr. Weatherman, until the end of the day on September 13, 2006. When plaintiff turned in his doctor's excuse, he did not tell Mr. Weatherman about his alleged falls at work during the day. Plaintiff's doctor's excuse was turned over to the plant nurse, Robin Sharpe.

10. Mr. Weatherman testified that the week before plaintiff's fall at home from the truck, plaintiff had inquired of Mr. Weatherman as to the amount of personal time plaintiff had available. Plaintiff told Mr. Weatherman he needed to know if the amount of the personal time *Page 5 he had remaining because he was having back problems and might need to take some time off from work.

11. Plaintiff did not report to work on September 14, 2006, the day following the alleged falls at work, but rather sought medical treatment from his family doctor. Contrary to plaintiff's testimony that he only injured his right thigh when he fell off the pickup truck, the medical history from plaintiff's visit to his family doctor indicates that plaintiff hit his right leg, right shoulder and right knee when he fell off the top of the truck bed. That note also indicates that while plaintiff was at work the day following the fall out of the truck, he had pain and swelling in his knee that increased as the day progressed.

12. Plaintiff did not apply at employer for FMLA under the Family Medical Leave Act. Plaintiff did not apply at employer for short-term disability until October 2006.

13. Jimmy Harris was employed at employer as a production manager for all of stamping and assembly. Mr. Harris testified that plaintiff eventually returned to work with restrictions which were accommodated by employer. Mr.

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

Related

Clark Ex Rel. Clark v. Burton Lines, Inc.
158 S.E.2d 569 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1968)
Taylor v. Twin City Club
132 S.E.2d 865 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1963)
Cole v. GUILFORD COUNTY AND HARTFORD ACC. & IND. CO.
131 S.E.2d 308 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1963)
Sandy v. Stackhouse Incorporated
128 S.E.2d 218 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1962)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Khan v. Tyco Electronics, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/khan-v-tyco-electronics-ncworkcompcom-2008.