Lakey v. U.S. Airways

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedOctober 3, 2001
DocketI.C. NOS. 243893 850617
StatusPublished

This text of Lakey v. U.S. Airways (Lakey v. U.S. Airways) 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
Lakey v. U.S. Airways, (N.C. Super. Ct. 2001).

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, the Full Commission AFFIRMS and ADOPTS the Opinion and Award of the Deputy Commissioner.

***********
Accordingly, the Full Commission finds as fact and concludes as matters of law the following, which were entered into by the parties as

STIPULATIONS
1. The parties are subject to and bound by the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

2. The Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania, through its servicing agent Alexsis, provides workers' compensation coverage for defendant-employer.

3. At all times relevant herein an employer/employee relationship existed between defendant-employer and plaintiff.

4. On October 2, 1992 the Industrial Commission approved the parties' I.C. Form 21 Agreement for Compensation, which concerned plaintiff's injury by accident of May 29, 1992 (I.C. File No. 243893).

5. For the period beginning August 1, 1997, defendants stipulate that plaintiff again became entitled to temporary total disability benefits, and defendants have paid plaintiff temporary total disability benefits at the rate of $275.82 per week for the period beginning August 1, 1997 and continuing thereafter to the present. Defendants contend that on July 17, 1997 plaintiff had a change of condition for the worse from her May 29, 1992 back injury, while plaintiff contends that on July 17, 1997 she had a new injury by accident to her back, which caused her to become totally disabled starting July 18, 1997 and continuing thereafter to the present.

6. In I.C. File No. 850618, which concerns an alleged June 28, 1996 injury by accident claim against defendants, plaintiff has taken a voluntary dismissal with prejudice.

7. Defendants stipulate that by at least June 1998, plaintiff's 1992 compensable back injury resulted in her depression, which defendants agree is also compensable. Defendants agree to pay Winston-Salem psychiatrist Uma Thotakura to treat plaintiff, including payment for all medication prescribed to treat plaintiff's depression secondary to her back pain as long as such medication tends to give relief, effect a cure or lessen the period of disability.

8. The following records were received as evidence by stipulation of the parties:

Stipulated Exhibit One, seventy-three pages of Industrial Commission proceedings; Stipulated Exhibit Two, Volume I of Plaintiff's medical records, 99 pages; Stipulated Exhibit Three, Volume II of Plaintiff's medical records, pages 100 through 189; Stipulated Exhibit Four, 46 pages of physical therapy records; Stipulated Exhibit Five, 81 pages of rehabilitation records.

9. The issues for resolution are as follows:

(a) On July 17, 1997 did plaintiff sustain a new injury by accident to her lower back and legs?

(b) If so, what was plaintiff's average weekly wage as of July 17, 1997?

(c) Did plaintiff fail to give defendants written notice of her claim as required by N.C.G.S. § 97-22?

(d) If so, were defendants prejudiced thereby?

(e) Will the Commission approve plaintiff's selection of Drs. Dichoso-Wood, McLean and Meloy to assume her care under N.C.G.S. § 97-25?

(f) Will the Commission order defendants to pay for the cost of a home whirlpool for plaintiff?

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

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. At the time of the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner, plaintiff was 48 years old. Prior to her accident of May 29, 1992, plaintiff worked as a flight attendant for the predecessor to US Airways. She generally worked a typical schedule of 70 to 80 hours per month.

2. Plaintiff's normal duties as a flight attendant for US Airways included frequent long periods of standing and walking; serving food and beverages, which included lifting, pushing and pulling the food and beverage carts up and down the aircraft aisle; and performing other related services for up to 200 passengers per flight.

3. Plaintiff was in good health with no problems with her lower back or legs until the events of May 29, 1992. On May 29, 1992, plaintiff sustained a compensable low back injury when, as she was squatted down in front of a beverage cart, the aircraft hit air turbulence, causing the cart to move and hit plaintiff. The moving cart knocked plaintiff over into the aisle where she landed on her tailbone, lower back and buttocks areas, resulting in a low back sprain.

4. On May 29, 1992, plaintiff was a full-time flight attendant, working for defendant-employer approximately 85 hours a month. As set forth in the Form 21 and subsequent agreements, plaintiff's average weekly wage at that time was $413.73, yielding a compensation rate of $275.82.

5. Pursuant to the Form 21 Agreement and various supplemental awards, defendants have paid and plaintiff has accepted temporary total disability compensation benefits at the rate of $275.82 per week for the following periods: May 30-September 1, 1992; October 14-25, 1992; March 17-May 2, 1993; October 28-November 18, 1993; May 2-8, 1994; August 5-September 11, 1994; and September 29-December 5, 1995.

6. Following the injury of May 29, 1992, plaintiff received treatment for her back injury continuing into 1996, as provided by different physicians approved by defendants, including Dr. David N. DuPuy, a Charlotte orthopedist; Dr. Raymond Sweet, a Charlotte neurosurgeon; Dr. Daniel Bernstein at defendants' Work Well Clinic in Charlotte; and Dr. Howard Jones of Aegis Occupational Health in Winston-Salem.

7. On June 3, 1996, plaintiff first saw Dr. Howard Jones, a specialist in occupational medicine. She complained of lower back pain, which Dr. Jones diagnosed as exacerbation of plaintiff's 1992 back injury.

8. In the period from June 1996 through June 1997, plaintiff saw Dr. Jones for treatment of her chronic lower back pain complaints on about 12 different occasions. She complained to Dr. Jones of chronic low back pain, with periodic exacerbation. Based upon her continued complaints, Dr. Jones treated plaintiff with pain medication, physical therapy, work hardening and limited work hours.

9. During most of the June 1996 to June 1997 period, due to her recurring back pain, plaintiff, with Dr. Jones' approval, limited her work hours with defendant-employer to 50 to 55 hours a month, rather than the usual 70 to 80 hours per month. She continued to experience periodic flare-ups of back and bilateral leg pain.

10. A provision in the collective bargaining agreement controls the terms of employment for defendant-employer's flight attendants, and provides that the top ten percent of flight attendants, as ranked by seniority, may elect to limit their work schedule to 55 hours per month. Plaintiff did not qualify in this top ten percent by seniority.

11. Sometime in February or March 1997, plaintiff requested defendant-employer to voluntarily allow her to permanently limit her work hours to 55 hours per month. She believed that she could work 55 hours per month, despite any flare-ups of her back pain.

12. By February 6, 1997, 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)
§ 97-22
North Carolina § 97-22
§ 97-25
North Carolina § 97-25
§ 97-29
North Carolina § 97-29
§ 97-42
North Carolina § 97-42
§ 97-90
North Carolina § 97-90

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Lakey v. U.S. Airways, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lakey-v-us-airways-ncworkcompcom-2001.