Lemly v. Colvard Oil Co.

CourtNorth Carolina Industrial Commission
DecidedSeptember 5, 2001
DocketI.C. NO. 717229
StatusPublished

This text of Lemly v. Colvard Oil Co. (Lemly v. Colvard Oil Co.) 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
Lemly v. Colvard Oil Co., (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 receive further evidence or to rehear the parties or their representatives, the Full Commission upon reconsideration of the evidence 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. The parties are bound by and subject to the provisions of the North Carolina Workers' Compensation Act.

2. An employer/employee relationship existed between plaintiff and defendant-employer at all relevant times.

3. Federated Mutual Insurance Company is the carrier on the risk.

4. Plaintiff sustained a compensable work-related back injury on 6 May 1997. Defendants accordingly filed a Form 60, Employer's Admission of Employee's Right to Compensation on 5 June 1997.

5. Plaintiff's average weekly wage is to be determined by a Form 22 Wage Chart. Plaintiff's compensation rate is $257.42 per week.

6. The parties further stipulated into evidence the following documents:

A. Industrial Commission Forms; 18, 19, 33 and 33R.

B. All employment and payroll records pertinent to plaintiff;

C. Plaintiff's medical records as follows:

(i) Medical records as follows:

(ii) Asheville Memorial Hospital (24 pp.)

(iii) Dr. Charles Branch (20 pp.)

(iv) Dr. Stephen Glazier (4 pp.)

(v) Thomas Rehabilitation (29 pp.)

(vi) Dr. Mark Moody (2 pp.)

(vii) Frye Regional Medical Center (4 pp.)

(viii) Hickory Orthopedic (10 pp.)

(ix) Dr. Harvey Russworm (5 pp.)

(x) Catawba Radiological Associates (1 p.)

***********
Based upon all of the competent evidence adduced from the record, the Full Commission makes the following additional:

FINDINGS OF FACT
1. At the time of the hearing before the Deputy Commissioner, plaintiff was a 44 year old married male with an 11 year old child. He is a high school graduate and attended Wilkes Community College for one year. Plaintiff worked six years for defendant-employer Colvard Oil Company driving a truck. He was also a truck driver for many years with Singer Furniture.

2. On 6 May 1997, plaintiff was employed by defendant-employer as a truck driver hauling asphalt. While pulling a tarp over the cargo in his truck, he felt a sudden pain in his back. The tarp weighed approximately 150 pounds, and although it was supposed to have spring assistance, the springs were broken and plaintiff was required to lift the entire weight himself. Plaintiff has also reported that on the day of his injury he was carrying large tree limbs in his truck and hurt his back while unloading them. Plaintiff's injury occurred late in the work day, and he was able to complete his shift.

3. Plaintiff's claim was accepted as compensable by defendants pursuant to a Form 60 dated 5 June 1997, and plaintiff was paid temporary total disability beginning from the date of injury. Plaintiff's medical bills were paid until 19 January 1998.

4. Immediately following his injury, plaintiff presented to Asheville Memorial Hospital Emergency Room. Within a day or two, plaintiff presented to Dr. Russworm, his family physician. On 19 May 1997, plaintiff underwent an MRI which showed mild degenerative disc and facet changes at L5-S1 and a mild posterior disc bulging at L5-S1. Plaintiff was diagnosed with lumbar strain and treated conservatively for several weeks, including physical therapy, which worsened his condition. When plaintiff's symptoms did not resolve, he was referred to Dr. Peter Hurley, an orthopedic specialist with Hickory Orthopedics Center, P.A.

5. Dr. Hurley first examined plaintiff on 18 June 1997. Plaintiff reported that he was injured at work on 5 May 1997 when he was lifting "something up". Dr. Hurley noted that plaintiff had been treated since the date of the injury with medications and physical therapy but reported only minimal improvement. Dr. Hurley wrote plaintiff out of work and scheduled a follow-up for three weeks later.

6. Dr. Hurley next examined plaintiff on 10 July 1997, and noted continued significant back pain. At that time, he opined that plaintiff may have sustained a tear in his annulus of one of his discs and put him on a steroid dose pack. On 24 July 1997, Dr. Hurley again noted continuing back pain and expressed the opinion that physical therapy was causing plaintiff irritation. Dr. Hurley recommended that plaintiff be given an epidural steroid injection, and that therapy be discontinued unless the epidural proved successful. Dr. Hurley continued plaintiff's out of work status.

7. On 13 August 1997, after several months of conservative treatment without appreciable result, Dr. Hurley ordered a second MRI for plaintiff's lower spine which he underwent on 19 August 1997. The MRI report was received on 27 August 1997, and showed that plaintiff had a possible herniated disc at L5-S1. Plaintiff also continued to have debilitating pain in his buttocks region. Dr. Hurley believed that plaintiff was a candidate for surgery, and referred him to a surgical spine specialist, Dr. Jeff Knapp, for further evaluation and possible surgery. Defendant-carrier, however sent plaintiff to a surgeon of its choice.

8. Plaintiff was referred to Dr. Mark L. Moody by the carrier for a second opinion on 4 September 1997. Although after a one time evaluation Dr. Moody confirmed Dr. Hurley's diagnosis of a herniated disc at L5-S1, he disagreed that plaintiff was a surgical candidate at the time. Dr. Moody recommended that plaintiff be placed in a functional restoration program for chronic pain management prior to consideration for an L5-S1 fusion.

9. Plaintiff was referred by Dr. Moody to Dr. Freeman E. Broadwell, III, at Thomas Rehabilitation Hospital in Asheville, North Carolina for follow-up treatment. Dr. Broadwell first consulted with plaintiff on 2 October 1997. According to Dr. Broadwell, plaintiff was frustrated at his condition and continued to have a great deal of pain.

10. Plaintiff was treated for several months by Dr. Broadwell. Dr. Broadwell wrote to defendant-carrier on 20 December 1997 that plaintiff was able to return to work at not more than a sedentary to mid-level physical effort with the ability to change positions as necessary. Defendant-carrier provided Dr. Broadwell with a job description for a convenience store clerk position which Dr. Broadwell stated appeared to be within plaintiff's restrictions.

11. Plaintiff was ordered to return to work for defendant-employer on 26 January 1998 as a convenience store clerk. Plaintiff was required to lift what he called a "money safe" which weighed, in his estimation, approximately 75 pounds, from the floor safe to the counter. Since the actual safe weighs between 150 and 200 pounds and is a permanent fixture, the Full Commission finds that the money safe to which plaintiff refers is most likely a cash box held within the safe. Plaintiff was also required to run the Deli section of the store, which involved refilling the hot dogs, condiments, and drink coolers, in addition to returning to the main counter area to check customers out. When not otherwise engaged in these duties, plaintiff helped with stocking boxes of merchandise. Plaintiff testified that he was not able to sit down all day, and when he left he could barely walk.

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

Related

Russell v. Lowes Product Distribution
425 S.E.2d 454 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Lemly v. Colvard Oil Co., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lemly-v-colvard-oil-co-ncworkcompcom-2001.